The NBA Thread.

I just find the idea of promoting one game as the ultimate evidence being ridiculous, too impulsive. As I said, Giannis performed better in previous games, too, but I don't use those one to two game examples to form my opinion. The reference to MJ, Bird, Kobe, etc. doesn't quite work because those guys used to have those type of dominant performances all the time. Damian Lilliard has had those type of performances, too, but he isn't on those legends level, either.

Again, I prefer to build a team around a guy who is more versatile, which is what I think Giannis is over Durant. I certainly wouldn't be upset with having Durant, as the guy is a phenomenal player. I've just never seen a situation in which Durant has been able to carry a franchise in the way Giannis has, nor shown dominance on the defensive end which Giannis has.

You always seem incredulous when someone doesn't agree with your opinion. Giannis is a two time MVP and a DPOY, a unanimous first team all-NBA guy this year. The idea I might prefer to build around him instead of Durant isn't some crazy, wild notion. It should give you more pause and thought to consider, really. I wouldn't be opposed to the idea Durant could be a better piece than Giannis, but 100 times out of 100? Eh, c'mon, a bit of hyperbole.

 

The one game is the ultimate evidence that Durant can play at a level Giannis just can't reach. It's not ridiculous or impulsive. Giannis doesn't have a playoff performance even approaching what Durant did last night. There is a huge difference between that and Giannis "performing better" in a couple games. With a series on the line, you want the guy who can deliver an all-time performance.

Where is Giannis carrying the Bucks franchise? To back to back second round exits? In the EAST? Durant absolutely showed the ability to carry OKC before he left for GS. He led them to a finals and challenged two all-time great teams (Spurs and Warriors) in Western Conference Finals during the time when you claim the West was FAR stronger than the East.

If the goal is to lock up a top 3 seed every year, then by all means, take Giannis. MVP, DPOY, all-NBA is great, but it's all regular season stuff. Giannis hasn't shown he can get much of anything done in the postseason. If your goal is postseason success and championships, you take Durant 100/100 times over Giannis, based on current available data. No hyperbole to it.

 

One game doesn't win a championship, placing so much emphasis on one game is the basketball equivalent of new [ussy pay]. It was the greatest game of Durant's career, not his regular game. If I'm needing a scorer, I'm taking Durant. But, Giannis has a higher playoff average in rebounds, assists, steals and blocks over Durant. So, once more, if I'm starting a team from scratch, I prefer to have the more all-around superstar rather than the electric scorer.

And, Durant has had success, but he's always been among stars, far more so than Giannis. At OKC, he had Westbrook and Harden, then Westbrook, both former NBA MVPs. At Golden State, he had Curry and Thompson with Curry winning 2 MVPs himself. On the Nets, he has Irving and Harden, though it's been a mish mash all year for them. He's always had more talent around him than Giannis ever did. So, it's not unreasonable to question whether or not a team with one superstar might prefer a more well rounded superstar who can affect more things than a prolific scorer might.

If he's never been THE guy, the only guy, essentially, to lead a team, how could you say "100/100" he would be THE guy you want over another guy who has been in this position his whole career?

 

Giannis ft shooting is embarrassing. Would make me want to hack in crunch time, and may cost them some games if so when it counts. Seems minimal, but it would be a difference maker to me when discussing crunch time playoff players

 

It's all mental now. He's gotten worse as he fidgets with his routine and his routine is stupid. He takes too long and has a hitch when he releases. Whoever taught him this is probably the same person who said he should shoot 4-5 threes a game. This person should be shot.

 

Needs to take a dribble, step to the line, look up and shoot in rhythm, imo. Make it more of a basketball play than standing still, staring, leaning back and overthinking for 8 seconds.
Or, like I had a kid do many years ago, take the pass from the ref and shoot the ball

 

Playoff series and championships regularly come down to one game.

I don't know why you're bothering to mention Curry or Klay. I didn't bring up Durant's time in GS when pointing out how he has carried teams. It's not a necessary part of the argument. I think this is what they call a "straw man."

Saying "he had Harden" in OKC is great, but it was 6th man of the year Harden, not perennial all-star, MVP caliber Harden. Compare Harden's regular season stat line from his last season in OKC to Jrue Holiday's stat line this year and try to make the case that Harden was objectively better/more impactful than Holiday. You can't do it because he wasn't.

And as good as Westbrook is at collecting stats, he has never been reliable in the playoffs. Furthermore, his breakout season didn't really come until 2014/2015 season when KD was hurt. This idea that he was, at that time (KD's run in OKC), head and shoulders above what Middleton is now is just revisionist history. Middleton has been a very solid #2 for Giannis throughout his entire 3 year run atop the East.

KD hasn't had Harden for most of this series and probably won't have Kyrie for the rest of it. Who had the better roster last night - Giannis or Durant? And we saw what happened.

KD has shown the ability to carry teams in the playoffs, which is what actually matters. Giannis hasn't. It's not even really debatable.

 

It's not debatable? How many [uck fay]ing times do you say this in this forum? Yes, it's debatable. It's all debatable because it's an opinion. I have no idea where you get this idea always where your opinion is so unimpeachable, but your arrogance here is tiresome. Hell, you don't even use "straw man" correctly.

Honestly, I don't give a shit about this argument enough to continue with me saying there's different things to consider and you saying you are 100% right here and always. I'm fine with the argument I made and will let it stand.

 

Straw man: an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.

My argument: "Durant absolutely showed the ability to carry OKC before he left for GS."

Your response: "Durant has had success, but he's always been among stars, far more so than Giannis... At Golden State, he had Curry and Thompson with Curry winning 2 MVPs himself."

Pretty sure that's like, a perfect example of a straw man. Instead of debating my actual argument (that KD carried OKC) with more than a single independent clause of depth, you bring up the players around him in GS (and Brooklyn)... because it's easier to defeat the argument that KD has always carried his team than it is to defeat the argument that he carried OKC.

The statement "Kevin Durant carried Oklahoma City during his tenure there" is no more debatable than the statement "the sun is showing in Baltimore right now."

 

That's not a straw man argument I was making. I was supporting my position with details, not addressing yours. I made the claim, so I was supporting it, which is my responsibility. Jesus, you are [uck fay]ing insufferable.

 

Which position were, you supporting, exactly? Was it your original position?:

The key word there is "never." In order to disprove "never," I just have to show one example of Durant carrying a franchise on his back. I made the argument that he carried OKC (and, by default, conceded that he didn't carry Golden State), and you responded by talking about GS. You weren't "supporting" the position you posted 3 posts earlier. You were responding to my argument.

 

No, it was my original point which we were arguing. Mine. So, my reference was to support the original position for which I maintained throughout the exchange. Simple, understand it or not. I'm done on this one, too, so respond how you will.

 

Yes, your original point: "Never carried."

To which I responded: "Had significant success at OKC prior to GS."

To which you responded: "Never carried."

To which I responded: "Carried OKC."

To which you responded: "Klay and Steph, 2x MVP"

There's a disconnect, whether you want to admit it or not. I don't believe for a second that in your 3rd post, the 5th post in our series of back and forth, in which you quoted my response directly, you were just "supporting your original point" and not attempting counter my argument.

 

Also, going back through your posts has revealed that you edited at least one after I responded, so I'm going to respond now to you trying to downplay what Durant did last night:

1. In reference to your comment about Dame in post#10261:

I said "wing" performances. Dame isn't a wing.

And no, Dame has not had 49-17-10-2-3 (with only 3 turnovers) on 70% from the field and 44% from 3 "type" of performances in pivotal playoff match ups to take a 3-2 series lead against a 2 time MVP and likely best team left in the playoffs while missing 1.5 of the best 2 other players on his roster. Just a weak statement all around.

Dame has only broken 40 pts in the playoffs 4 times (1 was a 2OT game). He's 2-2 in those games. One was a first round series against a garbage OKC team that got blown up that offseason, and the other was the sole win in a gentleman's sweep against the Warriors.

His 2 losses both came in a first round loss to the Nuggets (who were promptly swept in the following round). The only game you could even potentially point to as similar would be his 55 pt night in game 5. But still, there are significant differences. 11 less rebounds, not missing his 2nd and 3rd best players, not playing a high caliber team, and, most importantly, they lost (in 2OT).

2. In reference to your comment about MJ, Kobe, Bird, etc. (yeah, I noticed you left out LeBron) in post#10261:

All the time? You think MJ, Kobe, and Bird had performances like what Durant did last night "all the time?"

Please point to 1 game where Kobe or Bird even matched Durant's performance last night across the board:

• Sheer points scored
• Total statistics (Massive Triple double, blocks and steals, only 3 turnovers)
• From an efficiency perspective
• Control of the game (a bit subjective, but we can discuss)
• Down 1.5 of the next 2 best players on the roster
• Level of opponent
• Key win to take a lead in a playoff series

My experience with Bird is limited, but I don't think you'll find one example that comes close. I can think of a couple for Kobe, but I'm confident he will fall short in multiple of the above categories.

Even Jordan didn't do it "all the time." You'll find a some comparable performances, though I'm not sure you'll find one definitively better, when considering all of the categories I listed. Same probably goes for LeBron, to be honest.

 

...and of course lebron comes out with a school project looking tweet about "I told you so" and "listen to me" in regards to NBA injuries and blaming them on not enough rest. He has to make everything about himself. Tired act

 

You kind of make anything he says or does about how it makes you feel.

 

Whataboutism. You gotta stop.

 

Wait, what? He did say those things. He had a problem with the condensed season and starting at Christmas. He was vocal about it as the face of the league and a guy who, for the most part, represents the players more than any player not named Chris Paul.

And the numbers suggest this season has been particularly bad for injuries.

So what exactly is your issue with this tweet?

 

learn what things mean.

 

he doesn't like james and james said words. people he doesn't like shouldn't speak