Trade Giannis to those rosters for Lebron or Durant and I bet those teams would be more heavily favored
This feels like a very "prisoner of the moment" take. I don't think Giannis fits with the Lakers, like, at all. The Lakers need more playmaking ability on their team, but you think removing their best playmaker and replacing him with another 4/5, which they already have in Anthony Davis, is a good move? I don't see it at all. He may fit a little better with the Nets. He obviously would help them defensively, which they need, but I don't think he fits very well with Harden or Kyrie, who are both very ball dominant players. The main reason Durant fits in well with them is because he's an excellent catch and shoot guy. That's not Giannis.
I'm honestly very surprised with how much credit everyone is giving to Giannis. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve it, just that I'm surprised people have been so willing to give it. There are plenty of holes to poke in this title run (hobbled Nets pushed them to OT in game 7, his team closed out the last 2 games of the ECF without him, and the Suns team he beat in the finals is probably the 3rd or 4th best team in the West if everybody is healthy), yet I haven't really seen anyone trying to point them out.
When you come off injury and go for 50 to win a title, it's hard to dis the accomplishment. Plus he doesn't act like a beatch so he's easy to pull for
That's the thing though - it's not hard to dis the accomplishment. I just typed out three very easy and obvious holes that can be pointed out. Like I said, I'm just surprised more people aren't calling attention to them. Maybe it is his likeability. I do also think that people like the fact that he stayed and won it with the team that drafted him. But I think that says as much about the Bucks as it does about Giannis. They went out and took a risk overpaying for Holiday with no guarantee that Giannis would resign. OKC didn't do that for Durant, and Cleveland DEFINITELY didn't do it for LeBron. If they had, who knows?
It just seems to be what people do. People were critical of LeBron last year because of the bubble. People were critical of Kawai because of injuries to the Warriors. Critical of KD when he went to GS. Critical of LeBron because Kyrie hit the big shot, or Ray Allen, or because super team. At least a few people seem to do it every year, so I've just been surprised to see so many people willing to give Giannis credit this year and so few people speaking against it.
The only one with any real legs would be the What If? regarding the Nets and any reluctance to go there, although I have seen some do it, is probably the distaste for the way they were constructed as a "superteam" with a collection of three top ten players who contrived to guarantee themselves a title. There's no way the Nets should lose with 3/5ths of a probable East All-Star starters. So, the injuries are likely subconsciously seen as evening the playing field. Beating Atlanta twice without Giannis isn't particularly noteworthy. The Hawks were the walking wounded by the last 2 games and Middleton and Holiday had shown an ability to put up big numbers, but were wildly inconsistent. Plus, it was clear Giannis was essential in the long term as the Finals transpired. I don't know where the idea the Suns were the 4th best team in the West comes from, though. They were the 2 seed in the conference and only one game out of having the NBA's best record. They had a solid resume. I mean, I guess the Lakers would be there without the injuries, but the other teams mostly had their injuries late in the season or playoffs. Giannis gets credit because he had one of the all time greatest NBA Finals performances in NBA history, the only guy ever, I believe, to average over 35-10-5 for an entire series. And, he did it with two mid-level stars and a collection of solid role players in one of the smallest markets. So, I've heard some chatter, but I don't think it's too much. Plus, I don't see most teams/players with rings get their titles discounted too harshly, anyway. Maybe last year a little more because of the really odd, unique situation surrounding the players and team, but, once you hang a banner, there's not a whole lot to dismiss it.
I still think the Bucks could have beat the Nets, even if they had been healthier. Clippers pushed the Suns to 6 without Kawhi. No doubt in my mind they beat them if he plays. Lakers are better when healthy, like you said, and the Nuggets have a good shot at beating them with Jamal Murray, too. Middleton and Holiday are inconsistent, but Middleton can go off when needed, and Holiday’s defense is elite. Holiday wasn’t too far behind Giannis in importance for the Suns series.
Gotta think they’re bringing him in as an insurance plan. They probably think they could have won it all this year with a healthy LeBron and AD, and they probably think they get a healthy LeBron and AD if they hadn’t needed to rush them back to guarantee a playoff spot. Russ may not significantly improve their starting 5, but he’s good enough to win games without AD and LeBron. He can buy each of them games off, which seems valuable.
are you saying lebron hasn't had that much help before? that sure makes his accomplishments impressive, though I think he has had other good players around him. bold take though, he must be your GOAT right? Or were you just saying something without thinking it through