CalPolyTechnique
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 27,686
- Reaction score
- 44,617
Of course there intent is to win championships , every players goal is. I'm not saying either one was admirable for there choice im merely explaining why Durants choice is looked at worse then lebrons.
I have no idea how I confused 2007 with 2009 but the point still remains. while Miami did make it in the weak eastern conference they got immediately crushed by Boston in 5 games. the core team that took the floor in Boston and the core team that took the floor the following year were vastly different on many levels. where as the difference between the warriors core from the game 7, and the one that took the floor against the spurs was not as different outside of Durant replacing barnes.
Both moves were made to win championships, and both moves were negatively viewed but Durants move was bad in who he joined, while lebrons was bad on how he did it (the TV show, the "quitting " against Boston , the "choking" in the seasons prior)
Okay, I hear you there, but that's consistently been the primary ingredient in the Durant bashing that I've heard all off-season.
I don't think the point stands. Bosh and Lebron joined a playoff team to join forces with superstar already in his prime in Wade, with the hopes of championship titles. I'm not arguing that what Durant did is the same exact thing Bosh and Lebron did, but I am arguing that they aren't that different especially when you consider the intent and what they did is certainly not more admirable (my words not yours) than what Durant did.
Finally, the Warriors lost way more than just Barnes. They lost:
Bogut (starting center)
Barnes (starter)
Mo Speights (regular contributor)
Festus Ezeli (regular contributor)
Leonardo Barbosa (regular contributor)
The Warriors utilize their bench extensively and each of those guys were regular contributors on the floor. That's not even including some of the other minor role players that left too.