Lebron to Miami vs KD to GSW

5,627 Views | 46 Replies | Last: 7 yr ago by PatAg
Saint Pablo
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:30p, 6/8/17
So many people compare the decisions as if they are equivalent or equally punished the league. However, I don't think this is close to being remotely true.

Lebron joined a 47 win team and added Chris Bosh who had been named all NBA second team once. DWade at that point had made the all NBA team four times at that point in his career. Obviously making them the favorites to win the league, but did not make them unbeatable. Additionally, LeBron's move eliminated the Cavs contender status, but elevated the Heat to that level, which didn't change the number of contenders in the league.

KD's decision seems to have been much more catastrophic. The four time league scoring champion and MVP jumped ship to join the core unit from a 73 win team, which may have been the best team ever before his addition. He joined Klay Thompson who had been named to the all NBA team twice prior to this season, Draymond Green who was NBA all-defensive team twice and all NBA twice, Andre Iguodola who made the NBA all defensive team twice and was the Finals MVP (garbage), and of course, golden boy, Stephen Curry, four time all star, two time league MVP, and best three point shooter of all time. This move also eliminated OKC from contender status, but did not add another contender to the list in the NBA.

The two moves don't even compare. If that Miami team was a super team, I have no idea what that makes this team because it is in an entirely different stratosphere. LeBron's legacy should not be tarnished nearly as badly as Durant's for this weak move.
Reply Quote
11
AggieSportsGuy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:10p, 6/8/17
AG
I don't think most rational people believe they are similar.
Reply Quote
14
Pumpkinhead
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:43p, 6/8/17
AG
Bonus points though for LeBron to f*** over his hometown like he did though. An Akron kid ripping the heart out of Cleveland and the state of Ohio with 'The Decision' announcement and then the pep rally shortly after in Miami was all priceless drama. Durant's move caused some angst in Oklahoma but not nearly to the hate level that Cleveland went through. Right down to the Cav's owner totally melting down with a public hate letter to LeBron.

And a nation wide fan hate against LeBron carried over pretty much the entire next season. Presumably much of that due to who he left and how he left. Was listening to ESPN Zach Lowe's podcast recently who was comparing Durant's first year with Warriors to LeBron's first year with Miami. He said while LeBron was booed mercilessly at most road games during his first year, Durant got considerably less heat. For Durant, apparently only an early season game in Vancouver (for some reason) and of course the games at OKC got even close to the bashing that LeBron got.
Reply Quote
2
3 edits
jock itch
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:36p, 6/8/17
Bash Durant all you want, but are you seriously saying you would have chosen differently considering the options he had on the table?

As I've mentioned already in another thread, any choice other than GS would have been intentionally handicapping his chances of winning a title for the sake of what fans like you may think about his "legacy".

Would it have been more impressive if he stayed and took OKC to a championship? Sure, but that doesn't change the reality that any choice other than GS would be irrational if your goal is to win a championship.
Reply Quote
7
jock itch
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:41p, 6/8/17
To put it another way, take Tiger Woods back in his prime when he was winning majors by record setting margins.

Would it be more impressive if he had won those tournaments after conceding 5 shots to the field every time? Yeah...but it would also have been incredibly stupid if your goal is to win.
Reply Quote
1
yawny06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:51p, 6/8/17
AG
Quote:
Sure, but that doesn't change the reality that any choice other than GS would be irrational if your goal is to win a championship.
How so?

His team was one win away from knocking out the best regular season team in history, just after knocking another historically great (regular season wise) 67 win team in the previous round.

It would not have been irrational for him to stay in OKC, they would have been legit contenders. He could have very well made several eastern conference teams contenders as well.
Reply Quote
3
bmart97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:41p, 6/8/17
AG
I like Durant's decision because it was not the overhyped "Decision" & I too would have been in a hurry to leave the punkass Westbrook to join a group playing team ball in GS. That being said, I wish the league had a little more parity and rewarded good talent evaluation, development and continuity versus free agency signing.
Reply Quote
5
Kellso
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bmart97 • 8:49p, 6/8/17
bmart97 said:
I like Durant's decision because it was not the overhyped "Decision" & I too would have been in a hurry to leave the punkass Westbrook to join a group playing team ball in GS. That being said, I wish the league had a little more parity and rewarded good talent evaluation, development and continuity versus free agency signing.
Umm.....that is exactly how the Warriors were able to add Kevin Durant to a team that won 73 games.

Steph Curry, Klay Thompson and (especially) Draymond Green have all completely surpassed expectations from where they were drafted.

Props are due to the warriors for building their team the old fashion way....and that is through the draft.

The Warriors traded Monta Ellis for Bogut and drafted Harrison Barnes. These moves all netted them a title in 2015.
Reply Quote
8
CactusThomas
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bmart97 • 11:39p, 6/8/17
AG
bmart97 said:
I like Durant's decision because it was not the overhyped "Decision" & I too would have been in a hurry to leave the punkass Westbrook to join a group playing team ball in GS.


Good point.
Reply Quote
1
TajMaballer
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:44a, 6/9/17
AG
The Decision was an ego boost for Lebron and is the main reason I was salty about him going to Miami. Then I found out he donated all profits from the telecast to the boys and girls club. If the main blemish on someone's character resulted in 3 million dollars for kids, then they are doing pretty good in my book.

http://www.espn.com/nba/truehoop/miamiheat/news/story?id=6175574
Reply Quote
2
Pumpkinhead
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to yawny06 • 8:18a, 6/9/17
AG
yawny06 said:
Quote:
Sure, but that doesn't change the reality that any choice other than GS would be irrational if your goal is to win a championship.
How so?

His team was one win away from knocking out the best regular season team in history, just after knocking another historically great (regular season wise) 67 win team in the previous round.

It would not have been irrational for him to stay in OKC, they would have been legit contenders. He could have very well made several eastern conference teams contenders as well.
Yeah, he could have stayed in OKC and played with a guy that it now seems clear he was tired of playing with. And had like let's say a 30% to win an NBA title.

And he could have gone to the Eastern Conference team like Boston and had like a 20-25% chance to win an NBA title.

Or he could go to the Warriors and give himself like a 95% chance of winning an NBA title.

Why in anything in life, if you have a goal, would you take the path with 20-30% chance of success when there is a path available that gives you a 95% chance of success? I guess the posters on here poo pooing Durant's decision always in their personal lives do things 'the hard way'.
Reply Quote
3
bmart97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TajMaballer • 8:20a, 6/9/17
AG
Agreed that there was some redeeming factor to The Decision, but it still left a bad taste in my mouth.
Reply Quote
3
bmart97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Pumpkinhead • 8:27a, 6/9/17
AG
I completely agree with Durant's decision and would have done the same thing in that enviable position. I think most of us would like to see a league with more parity, not necessarily one with a handful of teams that barring injury are the only ones that could win it all. But maybe not, since so many love the NFL who have the Patriots.
Reply Quote
2
True Anomaly
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:00a, 6/9/17
AG
Not to make any judgements of people here, but I don't understand if you're anyone who claims to be right-wing, who wants a league with more "parity". This is the free market of the NBA.

KD did what was best for him. The Warriors were able to use the rules everyone plays under to offer him a spot. If you're not one of those two parties, too bad- that's just the way it goes.
Reply Quote
2
LouisHerbertWong
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:38a, 6/9/17
AG
KD's a b****. Period.
Reply Quote
8
Bruce Almighty
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to True Anomaly • 9:44a, 6/9/17
AG
True Anomaly said:
Not to make any judgements of people here, but I don't understand if you're anyone who claims to be right-wing, who wants a league with more "parity". This is the free market of the NBA.

KD did what was best for him. The Warriors were able to use the rules everyone plays under to offer him a spot. If you're not one of those two parties, too bad- that's just the way it goes.


Are you really trying to compare the NBA to politics? That's just stupid. We're talking about entertainment here.
Reply Quote
4
yawny06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:46a, 6/9/17
AG
Quote:
Why in anything in life, if you have a goal, would you take the path with 20-30% chance of success when there is a path available that gives you a 95% chance of success? I guess the posters on here poo pooing Durant's decision always in their personal lives do things 'the hard way'.
Yes...that is exactly what we do.

I never said I didn't understand Durant's decision to leave or join Golden State. I get it.

But all this talk about him being an "all time great" is just laughable in this context. He is a great talent, I'll give him that, but he is just riding the coattails of another team's success. A team that he literally had on the ropes and then choked away. Weakest move ever by a "superstar" is exactly right. Never said it was dumb.

It would be like me leaving my start-up business to go join my highly successful competitor because I couldn't beat them and then call myself a great entrepreneur in the process because I made a bunch of money. Great business decision? Absolutely. But it doesn't change reality.

The money still spends the same though, so there's that...

Reply Quote
yawny06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to True Anomaly • 9:49a, 6/9/17
AG
True Anomaly said:
Not to make any judgements of people here, but I don't understand if you're anyone who claims to be right-wing, who wants a league with more "parity". This is the free market of the NBA.

KD did what was best for him. The Warriors were able to use the rules everyone plays under to offer him a spot. If you're not one of those two parties, too bad- that's just the way it goes.
You are right. It is the "free market" of the NBA.

If they are willing to sit by and let the league become completely one sided and have what amounts to snooze fest in the playoffs, then so be it. But it will eventually hurt the league greatly.

Parity is what makes the league fun to watch. A coronation is just boring.


Reply Quote
1
Saint Pablo
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bmart97 • 9:56a, 6/9/17
There is much more parity in the NFL than there is in the NBA...the Patriots lose games, they don't make the Super Bowl every year...they aren't winning every single game by four touchdowns. GS is going to finish these playoffs undefeated and hasn't lost a game since February, I believe.
Reply Quote
Saint Pablo
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LouisHerbertWong • 9:56a, 6/9/17
This.
Reply Quote
ATM9000
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Saint Pablo • 11:40a, 6/9/17
AG
Saint Pablo said:
There is much more parity in the NFL than there is in the NBA...the Patriots lose games, they don't make the Super Bowl every year...they aren't winning every single game by four touchdowns. GS is going to finish these playoffs undefeated and hasn't lost a game since February, I believe.


If the game were structures in best ofs and the sample sizes were larger, the variance of finishes would revert to a hell of a lot more Patriots super bowl wins. Conversely, if the NBA were a 16 game season and 1 game single elimination playoffs, the variance of champions would explode.

That's simple probability.
Reply Quote
1
bthobig12
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:14p, 6/9/17
AG
LeBron brought Bosh with him (who would have gone to Cleveland if he had stayed there), which was significant. Also, I don't think anyone thinks it's the same thing, Durant to GS was clearly worse. That being said, how can people complain about Durant whenever he is following the same blueprint LeBron did? For the record, I don't like either of them. When you are as good as these guys are, stay where you are and build a team around you.
Reply Quote
True Anomaly
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to yawny06 • 1:29p, 6/9/17
AG
yawny06 said:
True Anomaly said:
Not to make any judgements of people here, but I don't understand if you're anyone who claims to be right-wing, who wants a league with more "parity". This is the free market of the NBA.

KD did what was best for him. The Warriors were able to use the rules everyone plays under to offer him a spot. If you're not one of those two parties, too bad- that's just the way it goes.
You are right. It is the "free market" of the NBA.

If they are willing to sit by and let the league become completely one sided and have what amounts to snooze fest in the playoffs, then so be it. But it will eventually hurt the league greatly.

Parity is what makes the league fun to watch. A coronation is just boring.


No, parity is socialism. And socialism is not fun to watch.

What makes the league fun to watch is the absolute elite of their sport being able to exercise their abilities, no matter what team they choose to play for. KD wanted to go play for GS. As a result, we're able to watch a collection of unbelievable talent who are extremely close to doing something that's never been seen before- an undefeated postseason.

KD going to GS generates more interest in the league, whether you love GS or you hate KD- it makes it more compelling. And, as a result, teams will work harder to try to figure out kinks in their armor and be smarter about their play to try to beat them. It makes for good competition. "Parity" dumbs down the competition because the motivation to beat the best is lessened.
Reply Quote
1
True Anomaly
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bruce Almighty • 1:30p, 6/9/17
AG
Bruce Almighty said:
True Anomaly said:
Not to make any judgements of people here, but I don't understand if you're anyone who claims to be right-wing, who wants a league with more "parity". This is the free market of the NBA.

KD did what was best for him. The Warriors were able to use the rules everyone plays under to offer him a spot. If you're not one of those two parties, too bad- that's just the way it goes.


Are you really trying to compare the NBA to politics? That's just stupid. We're talking about entertainment here.

I'm sorry you don't see it the way I do, but I'm simply pointing out what I see to be a logical fallacy. You don't have to agree with it, but it doesn't make my idea "stupid". What's "stupid" to me is being a free-market component, except when it comes to the business of basketball and thinking "parity" is a good thing
Reply Quote
yawny06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to True Anomaly • 1:47p, 6/9/17
AG
Nonsense.

There is no logical fallacy to being "right-wing" and expecting parity in a professional sports league. It is even more ridiculous to compare it to socialism. Not wanting government intervention in the market place =\= what you are implying. The league should be able to make decisions regarding how it structures itself to put out a competitve product.

By your logic, let's just move Texas A&M to the Southland Conference. We will have a huge probabilty of winning many conference titles and there is no reason why we shouldn't get to do so, being a conservative school and all.

Some of y'all would still have us in the Big X-II-II+II dumpster fire with the tea sip *****es. Funny this thread is about a ***** tea sip making a similiar move.
Reply Quote
4
Bruce Almighty
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to True Anomaly • 1:47p, 6/9/17
AG
True Anomaly said:
Bruce Almighty said:
True Anomaly said:
Not to make any judgements of people here, but I don't understand if you're anyone who claims to be right-wing, who wants a league with more "parity". This is the free market of the NBA.

KD did what was best for him. The Warriors were able to use the rules everyone plays under to offer him a spot. If you're not one of those two parties, too bad- that's just the way it goes.


Are you really trying to compare the NBA to politics? That's just stupid. We're talking about entertainment here.

I'm sorry you don't see it the way I do, but I'm simply pointing out what I see to be a logical fallacy. You don't have to agree with it, but it doesn't make my idea "stupid". What's "stupid" to me is being a free-market component, except when it comes to the business of basketball and thinking "parity" is a good thing
Yes it is stupid. I believe in the freedom of speech, but that doesn't mean I believe people should be able to tell their bosses to **** off because I believe in the constitution. Wishing there was more parity in a sports league because it would be more entertaining doesn't mean you are against a free market system. NBA is entertainment. That's all it is. A free market system is a business being able to do whatever it wants to do without government intervention. Nobody is saying that.
Reply Quote
jeffdjohnson
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:48p, 6/9/17
Quote:
No, parity is socialism. And socialism is not fun to watch.


The NBA is socialist. The players are capped. The teams are capped. Revenue sharing exists.

It is not "socialism" or "capitalism" that is fun to watch. It is competition. These playoffs have not had any competition and my interest has waned.
Reply Quote
2
yawny06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to jeffdjohnson • 2:23p, 6/9/17
AG
jeffdjohnson said:

The NBA is socialist. The players are capped. The teams are capped. Revenue sharing exists.

It is not "socialism" or "capitalism" that is fun to watch. It is competition. These playoffs have not had any competition and my interest has waned.
I wouldn't call it socialist.

The league can only exist if it has competitive teams. The same is true in business. However, I can go start up a business to compete with existing businesses if someone fails. You can't really start up a basketball club. The league needs those rules in place to protect its product.

If you let the league lose its competitiveness, you will end up with a lot more 1990's LA Clippers type clubs.

That will be really fun, won't it?
Reply Quote
Ozzy Osbourne
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bmart97 • 2:58p, 6/9/17
bmart97 said:
I completely agree with Durant's decision and would have done the same thing in that enviable position. I think most of us would like to see a league with more parity, not necessarily one with a handful of teams that barring injury are the only ones that could win it all. But maybe not, since so many love the NFL who have the Patriots.


I never feel like the Patriots are a lock to win the championship even though they have been a dynasty for so many years.
Reply Quote
1
Pumpkinhead
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:31p, 6/9/17
AG
'parity' in Sports is often a myth. By nature sports tend to have a very small minority of dominant teams or programs during a particular year or period of years. There are usually the 'haves' and 'have nots'.

Who is going to win the SEC in college football next season? Oh...let's see...Alabama? Is that a good guess?
Who is going to win the Big 12 in college basketball next season? Kansas? Given that they have won the Big 12 the last 12 years is that a good guess? And Kentucky will probably win the SEC in basketball, right? Since they usually do?


The World Cup in Soccer...hugely popular sport internationally...lots of countries participate, but only 8 countries have ever won a World Cup title. And, based on history, the next World Cup there is like a 70% chance the winner will be either Brazil or Germany or Italy.

And oh...yeah...it will *probably* be Cavs vs. Warriors again in NBA Finals next year. All of us can see a 4th consecutive meeting coming from miles away, barring injury. Just like predicting Bama gonna win the SEC in football next season. That is the safe bet.

We still watch the games though and the ratings are still good even when there is no sense of true 'parity', because everybody likes to hate the dominant teams on top and watches to see if anyone can beat them.
Reply Quote
1
6 edits
jock itch
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:04p, 6/9/17
Quote:
It would be like me leaving my start-up business to go join my highly successful competitor because I couldn't beat them and then call myself a great entrepreneur in the process because I made a bunch of money. Great business decision? Absolutely. But it doesn't change reality
So you even admit it was a "great business decision", yet you still chastise him for it? As the corollary, that implies that any other decision was a poor one considering what was on the table. You are literally saying he should have made a poor business decision just to appease fans like you.

Thanks for bringing up an even better analogy than I could. Durant turning down GS is essentially identical to a business intentionally handicapping themselves (i.e. purposely selecting bad suppliers, not picking the absolute best employees, etc) for the sake of proving how "badass" they are at business to everyone else.

It makes no damn sense. At least admit your argument is an emotional one and we can actually have a conversation.
Reply Quote
1 edit
jock itch
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ozzy Osbourne • 7:07p, 6/9/17
Ozzy Osbourne said:
bmart97 said:
I completely agree with Durant's decision and would have done the same thing in that enviable position. I think most of us would like to see a league with more parity, not necessarily one with a handful of teams that barring injury are the only ones that could win it all. But maybe not, since so many love the NFL who have the Patriots.


I never feel like the Patriots are a lock to win the championship even though they have been a dynasty for so many years.

As someone already pointed out, that's more a function of probability than anything else. If the NBA playoffs were all single games, we'd see the exact same "parity" that everybody seems so keen on.

It's just like March Madness. While the structure is exciting to watch for the average fan, it's a terrible way to actually determine a true champion.
Reply Quote
1 edit
yawny06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to jock itch • 7:24p, 6/9/17
AG
jock itch said:
Quote:
It would be like me leaving my start-up business to go join my highly successful competitor because I couldn't beat them and then call myself a great entrepreneur in the process because I made a bunch of money. Great business decision? Absolutely. But it doesn't change reality
So you even admit it was a "great business decision", yet you still chastise him for it? As the corollary, that implies that any other decision was a poor one considering what was on the table. You are literally saying he should have made a poor business decision just to appease fans like you.

Thanks for bringing up an even better analogy than I could. Durant turning down GS is essentially identical to a business intentionally handicapping themselves (i.e. purposely selecting bad suppliers, not picking the absolute best employees, etc) for the sake of proving how "badass" they are at business to everyone else.

It makes no damn sense. At least admit your argument is an emotional one and we can actually have a conversation.
No, that is not what I am saying at all...

My argument is not emotional and your analogies are terrible. Successfully starting a business from scratch takes a lot of dedication, hard work, and the risk that you might not succeed. You are, by default, at a significant disadvantage to established competitors from the beginning. There isn't a single business person I know that would intentionally handicap themselves just to prove how "badass" they are at business. That is nonsense. They do, however, believe they are the best at what they do and put what resources they have available to them to win in the market. And the truly great ones succeed no matter the odds. Steve Jobs would have never joined Bill Gates nor vice versa. They believed in themselves to the point they didn't need a stacked deck win. You can't go calling yourself a great entrepreneur when all you are is an employee.

Durant staying at OKC would have not been a poor decision, by the way. Your logic is explicitly implying that Durant had no chance of ever winning a championship unless he joined the Warriors. If that is the case, then he shouldn't be considered among the all time greats, like I heard Mark Jackson claim repeatedly while they dismantling the Spurs bench players.
Reply Quote
1 edit
ATM9000
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to yawny06 • 8:08p, 6/9/17
AG
yawny06 said:
jock itch said:
Quote:
It would be like me leaving my start-up business to go join my highly successful competitor because I couldn't beat them and then call myself a great entrepreneur in the process because I made a bunch of money. Great business decision? Absolutely. But it doesn't change reality
So you even admit it was a "great business decision", yet you still chastise him for it? As the corollary, that implies that any other decision was a poor one considering what was on the table. You are literally saying he should have made a poor business decision just to appease fans like you.

Thanks for bringing up an even better analogy than I could. Durant turning down GS is essentially identical to a business intentionally handicapping themselves (i.e. purposely selecting bad suppliers, not picking the absolute best employees, etc) for the sake of proving how "badass" they are at business to everyone else.

It makes no damn sense. At least admit your argument is an emotional one and we can actually have a conversation.
No, that is not what I am saying at all...

My argument is not emotional and your analogies are terrible. Successfully starting a business from scratch takes a lot of dedication, hard work, and the risk that you might not succeed. You are, by default, at a significant disadvantage to established competitors from the beginning. There isn't a single business person I know that would intentionally handicap themselves just to prove how "badass" they are at business. That is nonsense. They do, however, believe they are the best at what they do and put what resources they have available to them to win in the market. And the truly great ones succeed no matter the odds. Steve Jobs would have never joined Bill Gates nor vice versa. They believed in themselves to the point they didn't need a stacked deck win. You can't go calling yourself a great entrepreneur when all you are is an employee.

Durant staying at OKC would have not been a poor decision, by the way. Your logic is explicitly implying that Durant had no chance of ever winning a championship unless he joined the Warriors. If that is the case, then he shouldn't be considered among the all time greats, like I heard Mark Jackson claim repeatedly while they dismantling the Spurs bench players.


This entire post is drivel. Make no mistake about it, if Bill Gates and Steve Jobs could have joined forces to become a more powerful company together and it made sense for both companies, today you'd have AppleSoft.

We are probably no farther than the weekend away from Kevin Durant being the Finals MVP and you are still blabbering on about how he's riding coattails. Just stop. It's a ridiculous argument.

Take a step back and look at whats about to be reality... And you realize how just silly your entire premise is.
Reply Quote
1
2 edits
yawny06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ATM9000 • 9:08p, 6/9/17
AG
What's drivel is concluding that Durant staying in OKC was somehow a poor decision that would have been completely illogical. They had the talent, the coaching, the fan support, and surely the management to make it work and have a real shot at winning a championship.

What would all you guys say about Lebron if after he gets swept this year decided to join Golden State, if they could make it happen? Would that be his only "logical" choice?
Reply Quote
Page 1 of 2 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.