Yeah Woj is full of shit, Nike might like for Durant to win a ring, but he isn't doing anything to slow Curry.Adrian Wojnarowski @WojVerticalNBA
For Nike, this is a coup: It wanted to slow UnderArmour's momentum with Steph Curry and Warriors. Now, KD promises to impact Curry's star.
--
Interesting take but i don't buy it. Curry is the most popular athlete since Jordan for kids under 18.
I don't have a problem with what KD did but I find it dissonant (and it seems like a lot of other people do too). I mean how many other Top 5 players in any league are going to choose in the prime of their careers being second (or even third) fiddle on someone else's team? Maybe KD is just a different kind of player and he's happy not having to be the face of a franchise. There is nothing wrong with that but it's certainly not typical.I have no problem with what KD did. I'd have done the same thing.
Yeah but that's not a fair analogy. In the business world your success and earning potential is much more dependent on others than in a occupation where you play a game for a living and get paid based on your own individual talent.If I could make the same money at any one of thirty places I might pick the one that had the most talented employees, the most likelihood of success, the most fun, and the one in a top three city. And I think I'd like working with Steph Curry more than Russell Westbrook but that's just a guess.
If the nba held a draft tomorrow, who would get picked first after Lebron? There's maybe a chance that curry is 2nd. I doubt it though. To suggest that he will be the 3rd option is just downright illogicalI don't have a problem with what KD did but I find it dissonant (and it seems like a lot of other people do too). I mean how many other Top 5 players in any league are going to choose in the prime of their careers being second (or even third) fiddle on someone else's team? Maybe KD is just a different kind of player and he's happy not having to be the face of a franchise. There is nothing wrong with that but it's certainly not typical.
Yep, learned a lot about KD today. I could have understood a return to OKC, not joining a 72 win Warriors team.The move says a lot about KD's mentality, none of it very impressive. This is a guy with the talent to be in the best-10-players-of-all-time conversation but, rather than trying to lead a team to a few titles and cementing his place in that discussion, he'd rather guarantee a title or two and be content with a place alongside Worthy, Pippen, etc in the best-second-or-third-fiddle of all time conversation. Basically, he sacrificed a shot at true greatness just to reduce the chance that he goes through his career without a ring. And he made that sacrifice at 27, in his prime and with a lot of basketball left to play, not at the tail end of his career when desperation for a ring typically sets in.
Please enlighten me. What did you learn?Yep, learned a lot about KD today. I could have understood a return to OKC, not joining a 72 win Warriors team.
How about 73?I could have understood a return to OKC, not joining a 72 win Warriors team.
Except Durant is not in an occupation where he gets paid based on his own individual talent. If he were he'd be paid a lot more than Al Horford.Yeah but that's not a fair analogy. In the business world your success and earning potential is much more dependent on others than in a occupation where you play a game for a living and get paid based on your own individual talent.
ARod?I don't have a problem with what KD did but I find it dissonant (and it seems like a lot of other people do too). I mean how many other Top 5 players in any league are going to choose in the prime of their careers being second (or even third) fiddle on someone else's team?
Fair enough on some level. But football and basketball are different sports. Only the QB position, in which the ability to lead a team to a title is generally viewed as one component of the resume for those in the greatest-of-all-time-conversation, is equivalent to the upper echelon of NBA superstardom. Lets say Andrew Luck decided to sign with the Patriots in order to split time with Tom Brady, understanding that he would probably not play a major role in the playoffs, in order to maximize his chances of getting a ring. Would we erect a shrine to him for sublimating his ego, putting the team first, and just wanting to win? Obviously this would never happen for a great many reasons. But if you want to be in the conversation for all time great QBs, you have to earn it by leading a team to the Super Bowl. And if you want to be in the conversation for all time great NBA players, you need to do the same thing. Kevin Durant hedged. He maximized his chances of winning a title, therefore avoiding falling into the the Barkley/Malone category that you previously mentioned, but in so doing gave up his shot at staking a claim to be among the greatest players the league has ever seen. People value different things and maybe the latter just isn't all that important to him.You trying to wipe out BBTL? We erect shrines to people who sublimate their egos, put team first -- and we don't give a damn how they get here or when in their careers. Or how richly they are paid.
What does "being in the conversation for the all time greats" actually mean? I mean there is no definitive answer.Fair enough on some level. But football and basketball are different sports. Only the QB position, in which the ability to lead a team to a title is generally viewed as one component of the resume for those in the greatest-of-all-time-conversation, is equivalent to the upper echelon of NBA superstardom. Lets say Andrew Luck decided to sign with the Patriots in order to split time with Tom Brady, understanding that he would probably not play a major role in the playoffs, in order to maximize his chances of getting a ring. Would we erect a shrine to him for sublimating his ego, putting the team first, and just wanting to win? Obviously this would never happen for a great many reasons. But if you want to be in the conversation for all time great QBs, you have to earn it by leading a team to the Super Bowl. And if you want to be in the conversation for all time great NBA players, you need to do the same thing. Kevin Durant hedged. He maximized his chances of winning a title, therefore avoiding falling into the the Barkley/Malone category that you previously mentioned, but in so doing gave up his shot at staking a claim to be among the greatest players the league has ever seen. People value different things and maybe the latter just isn't all that important to him.
I'm sure you'd also respect him for going all in if it had been with a team other than the Warriors. Congrats on your team getting Durrant.What does "being in the conversation for the all time greats" actually mean? I mean there is no definitive answer.
I get that people want competitive balance but this guy has been in the NBA for nine years and has had one of the best young cores the NBA has seen in quite some time and they still haven't been able to get it done. He is going to be 28 before the next season starts, has had a serious foot injury and, despite his team playing at its maximum capabilities, he still couldn't get out of the West this season. Furthermore, he knows his team's other great player is almost certainly leaving next year so he is supposed to be a martyr and stay in OKC because he might have a shot a better legacy? Or go to Boston where he essentially is in the same spot - good enough to get close but likely not enough to get it done. This makes zero sense.
Today we learned a few things. Russell Westbrook is almost certainly a goner in OKC come next offseason (if not sooner now). We also learned that Kevin Durant is tired of doing the same thing and coming up short. He is likely also tired of the OKC ownership frittering away the team's talent when they had, arguably, the personnel to win a championship. And we learned that he values winning above all else, including money, this nebulous concept about legacy and what people think of him. That is about it.
Its your prerogative to root against Kevin Durant but I respect the guy a lot for essentially going all in to win a championship. I am certain many will feel otherwise and I believe you are right that people will question his "legacy". However, I suspect he gives zero fucks, especially if he gets to win a ring.
I am a Celtics fan first and wanted him to go to Boston. I was actually very bummed out by the news.I'm sure you'd also respect him for going all in if it had been with a team other than the Warriors. Congrats on your team getting Durrant.
My bad... I thought you were a warriors fan first. I'm bummed too.. I didn't think the C's really had a chance until the last few days... But I just want there to be more teams to root for or at least have a chance. The NBA where two to four teams have a real shot of winning has gotten a bit old. And now it's just gotten even worse.I am a Celtics fan first and wanted him to go to Boston. I was actually very bummed out by the news.
I think he would have been a great fit in Boston. I also think he likely would have retired without a ring barring the C's trading for an elite player (unlikely) or drafting the next great star next year. As much as it pains me, he did the best thing for his chance at winning a ring today.My bad... I thought you were a warriors fan first. I'm bummed too.. I didn't think the C's really had a chance until the last few days... But I just want there to be more teams to root for or at least have a chance. The NBA where two to four teams have a real shot of winning has gotten a bit old. And now it's just gotten even worse.
Of course.I think he would have been a great fit in Boston. I also think he likely would have retired without a ring barring the C's trading for an elite player (unlikely) or drafting the next great star next year. As much as it pains me, he did the best thing for his chance at winning a ring today.
"Going all in" implies he's risking something. If the most important thing to him was his legacy he would have found a situation where he could be the best player on a championship team. I don't see how anyone is going to be impressed when they win the title next year. This is like Shaq joining the 72 win Bulls. If Draymond was smart enough to realize that it's more important to stay on the court than punch guys in the nuts, or if Bogut doesn't get hurt, GS would be the two time defending champions.What does "being in the conversation for the all time greats" actually mean? I mean there is no definitive answer.
I get that people want competitive balance but this guy has been in the NBA for nine years and has had one of the best young cores the NBA has seen in quite some time and they still haven't been able to get it done. He is going to be 28 before the next season starts, has had a serious foot injury and, despite his team playing at its maximum capabilities, he still couldn't get out of the West this season. Furthermore, he knows his team's other great player is almost certainly leaving next year so he is supposed to be a martyr and stay in OKC because he might have a shot a better legacy? Or go to Boston where he essentially is in the same spot - good enough to get close but likely not enough to get it done. This makes zero sense.
Today we learned a few things. Russell Westbrook is almost certainly a goner in OKC come next offseason (if not sooner now). We also learned that Kevin Durant is tired of doing the same thing and coming up short. He is likely also tired of the OKC ownership frittering away the team's talent when they had, arguably, the personnel to win a championship. And we learned that he values winning above all else, including money, this nebulous concept about legacy and what people think of him. That is about it.
Its your prerogative to root against Kevin Durant but I respect the guy a lot for essentially going all in to win a championship. I am certain many will feel otherwise and I believe you are right that people will question his "legacy". However, I suspect he gives zero fucks, especially if he gets to win a ring.
As someone who's lived in Oklahoma my whole life and never heard shit about NBA before the Hornets briefly came to town, I just don't think so. Football is the only sport that matters here, and people only get into basketball teams (be it OU or OSU or the Thunder) when they're winning. a few years of losing teams and the team will crater and be wanting out of Oklahoma faster than KD.One interesting subplot to keep an eye on here: Is OKC even a viable NBA market again? Assume for a second that they lose Westbrook, too. Then what?
There won't be a thunder for Durant to go back to if he waits too long.If Durant goes back to OKC and brings them a title, you may be right. LeBron bringing a title to his hometown agains the best regular season team ever makes him look a lot better in the eyes of many fans.
Once again, Durant left money on the table and is drawing the ire of many sports fans like you as well as the hot takes crowd who is now questioning his character. And if the Warriors fail to win, he will be judged very harshly by history."Going all in" implies he's risking something. If the most important thing to him was his legacy he would have found a situation where he could be the best player on a championship team. I don't see how anyone is going to be impressed when they win the title next year. This is like Shaq joining the 72 win Bulls. If Draymond was smart enough to realize that it's more important to stay on the court than punch guys in the nuts, or if Bogut doesn't get hurt, GS would be the two time defending champions.
Only if that team is Boston.Once again I ask those being critical of Durant - is he supposed to stay in OKC if Westbrook is leaving? Or go to a team that has less talent?
Stephen A does.Magic and Kareem played with each other, and had Worthy. Bird had McHale, Jordan had Pippen. I really don't understand what GOAT conversations Durant took himself out of this weekend. If OKC had drafted Curry and signed Green as an FA to get here, no one would be saying the same thing. Who cares how we got here?
I agree with the main thrust of your post--KD should do what he thinks is best for him.Celtic fans didn't have an issue with it when it worked to our benefit for the majority of the first 40 years of the history of the league.
Yes, I agree, but my point was more about the fact that in the history of the NBA teams stacked with great players is more the norm than the exception.I agree with the main thrust of your post--KD should do what he thinks is best for him.
However, there's a huge difference in how the Celtics acquired their players and how it happens now.
How about go to a fun, successful, and cohesive team that welcomed him with open arms, and also happens to be in a beautiful city with a rabid fan base? We should all be so fortunate in our professional lives. As others have said, as far as personal, ego-driven glory, there's not a lot of upside here- he'll get little credit if they win, and a world of shit and schadenfreude if they don't- but he's essentially sacrificing the laurels of personal greatness for being part of a great team. In other contexts, that's universally lauded, but in the NBA, to the Stephen A. Smiths of the world I guess it means he's a coward. He could've stayed on a one-and-one, even knowing that Westbrook was leaving, sure. But he'd likely just be in the same position next year, just a year older. Had he chose the Celtics, he would have gotten shit for dodging the Western Conference, it just wouldn't have been from people here.Once again, Durant left money on the table and is drawing the ire of many sports fans like you as well as the hot takes crowd who is now questioning his character. And if the Warriors fail to win, he will be judged very harshly by history.
Once again I ask those being critical of Durant - is he supposed to stay in OKC if Westbrook is leaving? Or go to a team that has less talent?
My disappointment is more with the NBA than Durant himself. Last year was a great season and fun to watch. This year is going to be a lot less fun. Durant has the right to do what he wants. He should go where he wants to go. I just don't see his decision as something to respect or celebrate. In fact, I think it sucks because it makes the NBA a lot less fun, and it's disappointing that this is what he wants. I don't have a right or wrong answer for what he should do. But I like him less and respect him less for making the NBA a lot less fun. Selfishly I wanted him to come to Boston, but any other decision would have been better than this.Once again, Durant left money on the table and is drawing the ire of many sports fans like you as well as the hot takes crowd who is now questioning his character. And if the Warriors fail to win, he will be judged very harshly by history.
Once again I ask those being critical of Durant - is he supposed to stay in OKC if Westbrook is leaving? Or go to a team that has less talent?
Would 'Melo really agree to move to Cleveland? Would an older Chris Paul be better than Kyrie Irving by that point? I mean, I don't think that's happening.And for some wild speculation, because I think the following scenario is more likely than people here seem to think given the lack of discussion about it- it's also possible he gives some credence to Lebron's superteam dream coming into form next year. If he thinks Lebron/CP3/Wade/Melo is happening next year, I wonder if that changes people's perception of his decision.
I'm really hoping Danny is aggressively looking to get Westbrook as he appears to potentially be on the market. The Celtics may be able to put a nice package together for a now possibly rebuilding Thunder...Really rooting for Westbrook to go to the Spurs next year, as Mannix floated recently, and fuck over the Warriors a couple times. I just hope this super team implodes somehow.
First of all, I strongly disagree with the first sentence. The East was a fait accompli all year, and the West got a lot weaker after the top four than it had been for years. GS/SA played at a historic level, but OKC choked away virtually every big regular season game they played in. No one took them seriously until Adams and Roberson emerged in the playoffs and they kicked it up a level. And the GS team everyone is worried about "ruining" the league won a league record 73 games. They are better on paper, but do you think they're going to win more than 73? If so, I'd like to see that.Last year was a great season and fun to watch. This year is going to be a lot less fun.
This is the second time you've made this point, as if somehow Westbrook forced his hand. Westbrook's fate in OKC was sealed by Durant's decision, not the other way around. The way you keep saying that feels like a weird justification.Once again, Durant left money on the table and is drawing the ire of many sports fans like you as well as the hot takes crowd who is now questioning his character. And if the Warriors fail to win, he will be judged very harshly by history.
Once again I ask those being critical of Durant - is he supposed to stay in OKC if Westbrook is leaving? Or go to a team that has less talent?
I don't really think so either- it's more likely that Wade signs with Miami by the end of the day today and makes this look like the foolishness it probably is- but Lebron has talked about it enough to make me think that it's something those guys are actually considering. The most workable plan I've seen actually has Melo as the one staying put- the Knicks will have a ton of cap space next year. So if I'm Durant and I think that CP3/Wade/Lebron/Melo/Porzingis is an actual possibility in a year, that makes Golden State all the more attractive.Would 'Melo really agree to move to Cleveland? Would an older Chris Paul be better than Kyrie Irving by that point? I mean, I don't think that's happening.
While Horford may have signed here and Durant entertained it, Westbrook is seen as someone that's going to LA or NY as a free agent if he doesn't stay in OKC (which seems far-fetched). There's no way I'd give up anything of consequence for a one year rental of Westbrook.I'm really hoping Danny is aggressively looking to get Westbrook as he appears to potentially be on the market. The Celtics may be able to put a nice package together for a now possibly rebuilding Thunder.
Why do people keep saying "years?"
It's one year. He'll opt out, because everyone does, and we'll have the same circus next year. If the Celtics make noise this year, he'll consider them again. But he's going to go for the ring this year and the money next year and beyond. Seems pretty smart to me.
I think it's pretty obvious he's taking his shot at the ring. If he gets it, he's out to whoever provides the most money and a decent shot at another title. Where it gets interesting is if they don't win next year. Does Durant stay and try one more time? That's the most likely outcome. So it's two shots at one ring and then back out to FA for the best deal he can get.Because he can do both of those in Golden State.
Why go for a ring when you can go for rings?
He values winning the most right now. Once he gets a taste, I think it will be all about the cash with a reasonable chance to win a title again. Unlike with LeBron going CLE->MIA->CLE, he won't be going back to OKC, but he'll head somewhere with a really good shot.Today we learned a few things. Russell Westbrook is almost certainly a goner in OKC come next offseason (if not sooner now). We also learned that Kevin Durant is tired of doing the same thing and coming up short. He is likely also tired of the OKC ownership frittering away the team's talent when they had, arguably, the personnel to win a championship. And we learned that he values winning above all else, including money, this nebulous concept about legacy and what people think of him. That is about it.
Its your prerogative to root against Kevin Durant but I respect the guy a lot for essentially going all in to win a championship. I am certain many will feel otherwise and I believe you are right that people will question his "legacy". However, I suspect he gives zero fucks, especially if he gets to win a ring.
I have no more information than you (or perhaps less) but given the fact that Durant actually pulled the trigger now rather than next year strongly suggests that he knows Westbrook is leaving.This is the second time you've made this point, as if somehow Westbrook forced his hand. Westbrook's fate in OKC was sealed by Durant's decision, not the other way around. The way you keep saying that feels like a weird justification.
I think the common expectation was that Durant would sign a 1+1 in OKC. They'd roll back the team that was 4 minutes from the Finals, only with Oladipo in place of Ibaka specifically to help them match up against Golden State. They would have had a very real chance of winning a championship, and if that's the case, I don't think either Durant or Westbrook leaves OKC. And if they fell short again, they'd both be entering free agency in the year that allowed them to maximize their earnings and could either dictate how OKC needed to proceed to keep them, or move on.
I don't really fault Durant, to be clear. Players can and should go where they want, and player movement makes the NBA far more interesting to me than the opposite. I just find it odd that twice now you've basically said that Durant decided to leave because Westbrook did.
I'm not sure about the LBJ superteam, but I think there's an excellent chance KD is one and done in Oakland. A lot of the hot-takes on his motives assume otherwise.And for some wild speculation, because I think the following scenario is more likely than people here seem to think given the lack of discussion about it- it's also possible he gives some credence to Lebron's superteam dream coming into form next year. If he thinks Lebron/CP3/Wade/Melo is happening next year, I wonder if that changes people's perception of his decision.
Who sees him this way? Do you have any sources on that outside of speculation based on the fact that he's from LA? Westbrook is one of the most competitive guys in the NBA. I have a really hard time seeing him going to a stripped bare Lakers team, and not looking for a place to win.While Horford may have signed here and Durant entertained it, Westbrook is seen as someone that's going to LA or NY as a free agent if he doesn't stay in OKC (which seems far-fetched). There's no way I'd give up anything of consequence for a one year rental of Westbrook.