KD was a weak beta for going to the Warriors BUT...

[dankok8]

...the Warriors needed him.

Here is his ON-OFF from 2017 to 2019.

Regular Season:

Durant ON: +11.35
Durant OFF: +3.24

Playoffs:

Durant ON: +12.75
Durant OFF: +2.48

Those are really good ON-OFF numbers on a team that good. In the playoffs he was even more important to them.

When looking at his ON-OFF with and without Curry.

Regular Season:

Durant ON Curry ON: +15.89
Durant ON Curry OFF: +2.40
Durant OFF Curry ON: +12.44
Durant OFF Curry OFF: -3.79

Playoffs:

Durant ON Curry ON: +14.82
Durant ON Curry OFF: +6.98
Durant OFF Curry ON: +6.59
Durant OFF Curry OFF: -5.03

Yes the Warriors had a great record without KD. Curry was definitely the engine in the regular season and they didn't miss Durant.

In the playoffs it's a different story. The lineups with Durant ON Curry OFF actually did a bit better than the reverse.

KD was arguably the Warriors best player in the playoffs. It's probably ok to say that he and Curry were 1a/1b. But either way it's very doubtful the Warriors win any titles in this span without KD. The narrative that he was the cherry on top is misguided.

Source: PBP Stats

[Hey Yo]

The Warriors were weak to recruit him for most of the 2016 season.


https://www.nbcsports.com/nba/news/report-warriors-players-recruited-kevin-durant-throughout-season

[Real Men Wear Green]

He made them the most talented team of all time. If the two best scorers in the league complimented by the second best shooter of all time with the greatest shooter of all time being one those top two Durant also being one of three five best shooters... the worst shooter of their five best players was one of the leagues top triple double threats and they also had one of the best defenses in the league. If Durant was more of a competitor he never would have joined them but if we ignore that he could have pushed that team to win well over 70 games.

So when you say they needed him... what do you mean? They still would have been very good. Are you just talking about beating Cleveland in the Finals? He put them over the top but even that is debatable. He joined a 73 win team. That's why he gets so little praise for those rings.

[1987_Lakers]

A 73 win team "needed" him, makes sense.

[tpols]

The warriors averaged 70 wins per season in 2015 and 2016, won a championship, and were a bogus suspension away from going back to back. They didn't "need" KD... He just made them unbeatable.

[SouBeachTalents]

If Harrison Barnes doesn't go 5/32 over the final 3 games of the Finals they would've gone b2b with Barnes in his place, including averaging 70 wins a season. So no, they absolutely did NOT need Kevin Durant, absolutely ludicrous statement.

[dankok8]

The Warriors' good but unimpressive track record in the playoffs without KD says otherwise.

If KD never joined, there is a good chance that the Warriors go ringless from 2017-2019. They wouldn't beat the 2017 Cavs or 2018 Rockets without him. Thus they NEEDED him.

[1987_Lakers]

The Warriors' good but unimpressive track record in the playoffs without KD says otherwise.

What track record is that? Winning two rings without him? :oldlol:

[Im Still Ballin]

The only thing I'll say is that GSW did pretty well when Durant went down in the 2019 playoffs. GSW also did solidly when Curry went down in the 2016 playoffs. Draymond stepped his game up on both occasions if I recall correctly.

[Hey Yo]

The Warriors' good but unimpressive track record in the playoffs without KD says otherwise.

If KD never joined, there is a good chance that the Warriors go ringless from 2017-2019. They wouldn't beat the 2017 Cavs or 2018 Rockets without him. Thus they NEEDED him.

Pure speculation on your part.

[SouBeachTalents]

The Warriors' good but unimpressive track record in the playoffs without KD says otherwise.

If KD never joined, there is a good chance that the Warriors go ringless from 2017-2019. They wouldn't beat the 2017 Cavs or 2018 Rockets without him. Thus they NEEDED him.
Here's their track record in the playoffs without KD

Championship

Literally a play or two away from another championship

6 straight wins without KD, likely a 7th game of the Finals if Klay is healthy

Championship

Yeesh, that is an unimpressive track record alright :lol

[hold this L]

danko's takes on KD are about as delusional as his Messi takes in the soccer thread. :facepalm KD made the Warriors unbeatable. Before that they were at worst, the second best team in the entire league.

[RRR3]

Dankok trying to discredit LeBron part 384283838

[dankok8]

What track record is that? Winning two rings without him? :oldlol:

The Warriors would never be discussed historically among the greatest dynasties ever if KD didn't come over.

Yes unimpressive...

2015:
- taken to 6 games by 53 win +4.08 SRS Cavaliers with their 2nd and 3rd best players injured
2016:
- taken to 7 games by 55 win +7.09 SRS Thunder
- beaten in 7 games by 57 win +5.45 SRS Cavaliers
2019:
- beaten in 6 games by 58 win +5.49 SRS Raptors

And the 2022 ring came with a totally different roster in a much weaker NBA. The 2022 Warriors are probably among the top 5 worst champions since the merger.

[1987_Lakers]

The Warriors would never be discussed historically among the greatest dynasties ever if KD didn't come over.

KD put them as the GOAT team, but in your OP you said they "needed" him. Way to move the goal posts.

[dankok8]

Guys just to be clear. I'm not saying the Warriors weren't good without KD. I'm saying they weren't historically dominant in the postseason without him.

[SouBeachTalents]

The Warriors would never be discussed historically among the greatest dynasties ever if KD didn't come over.

Yes unimpressive...

2015:
- taken to 6 games by 53 win +4.08 SRS Cavaliers with their 2nd and 3rd best players injured
2016:
- taken to 7 games by 55 win +7.09 SRS Thunder
- beaten in 7 games by 57 win +5.45 SRS Cavaliers
2019:
- beaten in 6 games by 58 win +5.49 SRS Raptors

And the 2022 ring came with a totally different roster in a much weaker NBA. The 2022 Warriors are probably among the top 5 worst champions since the merger.
Now you're shifting your argument. You didn't say they wouldn't be a dynasty without KD, which honestly is debatable, you said they "needed" him, which is what every single poster in the thread has disagreed with you on.

[dankok8]

KD put them as the GOAT team, but in your OP you said they "needed" him. Way to move the goal posts.

You think the Warriors beat the 2017 Cavs and 2018 Rockets without KD?

I don't...


Now you're shifting your argument. You didn't say they wouldn't be a dynasty without KD, which honestly is debatable, you said they "needed" him, which is what every single poster in the thread has disagreed with you on.

Sorry I should have been clear that I was talking from the standpoint of a historical dynasty not that the Warriors would be bad without KD. That would be a stupid argument to make and not what I was going for.

[1987_Lakers]

You think the Warriors beat the 2017 Cavs and 2018 Rockets without KD?

I don't...

We don't know. It's just all speculation. What we do know is that the Warriors beat the Rockets the next season in 2019 without KD, with the Rockets pretty much having the same cast from 2018.

[ShawkFactory]

We don't know. It's just all speculation. What we do know is that the Warriors beat the Rockets the next season in 2019 without KD, with the Rockets pretty much having the same cast from 2018.

They weren't without KD in 19.

[1987_Lakers]

They weren't without KD in 19.

Yes they were. KD got injured in game 4 vs Houston, series was tied 2-2. Warriors then went on and won two straight without KD to close the series.

Just did a quick search and it turns out he got injured in the middle of game 5, Warriors went on a run without him and won, then closed out game 6 without him.

[dankok8]

The Warriors without KD lost to the 2016 Cavs and 2019 Raptors and almost lost to the 2016 Thunder but somehow they would beat the 2017 Cavs and 2018 Rockets.

:facepalm

I mean sure it's speculation and anything could happen but logically the Warriors would probably lose in 2017 and 2018 without KD.

Houston in 2018 was a 65-win +8.21 SRS team and in 2019 they were a 53-win +4.96 SRS team. Way to play dumb.

[SouBeachTalents]

What has to be kept in mind is it wasn't KD or nothing. If they never signed KD I'm sure they could have bolstered their roster with either another all-star caliber player or some really good supporting players. As long as they had their Big 3 + Iggy they were going to be a championship contender regardless, and were actually the initial Vegas favorites even before KD signed there.

[RRR3]

Remember when OP made a poll and rigged the results when LeBron won? :lol

[hold this L]

The Warriors without KD lost to the 2016 Cavs and 2019 Raptors and almost lost to the 2016 Thunder but somehow they would beat the 2017 Cavs and 2018 Rockets.

:facepalm

I mean sure it's speculation and anything could happen but logically the Warriors would probably lose in 2017 and 2018 without KD.

Houston in 2018 was a 65-win +8.21 SRS team and in 2019 they were a 53-win +4.96 SRS team. Way to play dumb.
The Warriors were a bogus suspension away from winning in 2016 and had Klay, another player not gotten injured, they could have also won in 2019. Iggy was also injured in half the games, Looney also got hurt during the series. But yeah, remove context and write dipshit answers instead to prove your point.

[dankok8]

The Warriors were a bogus suspension away from winning in 2016 and had Klay, another player not gotten injured, they could have also won in 2019. Iggy was also injured in half the games, Looney also got hurt during the series. But yeah, remove context and write dipshit answers instead to prove your point.

Injuries also affected the Warriors' opponents.

Warriors could have lost in 2015 if Kyrie and Love weren't hurt. They could have lost in 2018 if Paul wasn't hurt.

It goes both ways.

[hold this L]

Injuries also affected the Warriors' opponents.

Warriors could have lost in 2015 if Kyrie and Love weren't hurt. They could have lost in 2018 if Paul wasn't hurt.

It goes both ways.

No shit. That doesn't change that you said the team wasn't good enough to win both those seasons, which is you know.. is the point of this entire thread. They were good enough to win either of those years. You've been wrong about KD spouting this nonsense for years now and still rambling on about it.

[warriorfan]

Op smoking some dope today

[warriorfan]

Remember when OP made a poll and rigged the results when LeBron won? :lol

no one rigged anything. you guys had a legit 3 year old who’s mom just told him he can’t get a candy bar at the supermarket meltdown saying people were using alts when I am pretty sure there wasn’t

then meanwhile LeBron23 was voting on both his LeBron23 and Iverson3 accounts and the lebron stans legit tried to pretend they were different people


:roll:

[Axe]

They won in 2015 but only when both love and irving were hobbled to play in that finals.

[dankok8]

No shit. That doesn't change that you said the team wasn't good enough to win both those seasons, which is you know.. is the point of this entire thread. They were good enough to win either of those years. You've been wrong about KD spouting this nonsense for years now and still rambling on about it.

They probably wouldn't have won either year without KD. The Warriors wouldn't be a dynasty without KD. That was my point and in that context they needed him.

[Axe]

They probably wouldn't have won either year without KD. The Warriors wouldn't be a dynasty without KD. That was my point and in that context they needed him.
The dubs were immediately guaranteed to win a ring the moment he got there. And it happened, at the cost of the league being entertaining during that time.

[tpols]

What track record is that? Winning two rings without him? :oldlol:

Guy doesn't even remember they won with an up to that point underachieving Andrew Wiggins in KDs place.

Smh.... :facepalm :lol

[ILLsmak]

They were so good w/ KD dude left to build his own legacy haha. Even after taking the FMVPs.

They were so good the whole team hated him.

-Smak

[Jasper]

was Westbrook a cupcake going to the Lakers ????

he branded KD that going to the Warriors

Fast forward Bucks win a title with Giannis as the only true superstar of that team..:sleeping

[tpols]

Fellas...

The warriors were so helpless without Durant that they won championships before and after he was on the team.

[SouBeachTalents]

Fellas...

The warriors were so helpless without Durant that they won championships before and after he was on the team.
They still needed him though.

[Axe]

Fellas...

The warriors were so helpless without Durant that they won championships before and after he was on the team.
Only goes to show how stacked they were bt.

[1987_Lakers]

no one rigged anything. you guys had a legit 3 year old who’s mom just told him he can’t get a candy bar at the supermarket meltdown saying people were using alts when I am pretty sure there wasn’t

then meanwhile LeBron23 was voting on both his LeBron23 and Iverson3 accounts and the lebron stans legit tried to pretend they were different people


:roll:

It was riggged. Not only did he allow kawhileanord to vote, but other trolls like Bison who are known LeBron haters. You were shook Curry wasn’t voted best playoff performer in any of the 2015-2018 years.

[dankok8]

It was riggged. Not only did he allow kawhileanord to vote, but other trolls like Bison who are known LeBron haters. You were shook Curry wasn’t voted best playoff performer in any of the 2015-2018 years.

And guys like 8Ball, Shooter and Corporation are unbiased posters.

GTFOH

[iamgine]

...the Warriors needed him.

Here is his ON-OFF from 2017 to 2019.

Regular Season:

Durant ON: +11.35
Durant OFF: +3.24

Playoffs:

Durant ON: +12.75
Durant OFF: +2.48

Those are really good ON-OFF numbers on a team that good. In the playoffs he was even more important to them.

When looking at his ON-OFF with and without Curry.

Regular Season:

Durant ON Curry ON: +15.89
Durant ON Curry OFF: +2.40
Durant OFF Curry ON: +12.44
Durant OFF Curry OFF: -3.79

Playoffs:

Durant ON Curry ON: +14.82
Durant ON Curry OFF: +6.98
Durant OFF Curry ON: +6.59
Durant OFF Curry OFF: -5.03

Yes the Warriors had a great record without KD. Curry was definitely the engine in the regular season and they didn't miss Durant.

In the playoffs it's a different story. The lineups with Durant ON Curry OFF actually did a bit better than the reverse.

KD was arguably the Warriors best player in the playoffs. It's probably ok to say that he and Curry were 1a/1b. But either way it's very doubtful the Warriors win any titles in this span without KD. The narrative that he was the cherry on top is misguided.

Source: PBP Stats

You can't go by that because if they didn't have Durant, they'd have someone else.

[hold this L]

They probably wouldn't have won either year without KD. The Warriors wouldn't be a dynasty without KD. That was my point and in that context they needed him.

Your point is dumb as f*ck. With injuries, one of which they had KD and several players injured made no difference because the players themselves couldn't compete.. including KD.

[1987_Lakers]

And guys like 8Ball, Shooter and Corporation are unbiased posters.

GTFOH

What are you talking about? You didn't count any of those guys' votes for LeBron.

You even said "kawhileonard2 makes intelligent posts at times" :oldlol:

[Full Court]

Dankok trying to discredit LeBron part 384283838

Wow, you're really insecure.

What a loser. :roll:

[Full Court]

What are you talking about? You didn't count any of those guys' votes for LeBron.

You even said "kawhileonard2 makes intelligent posts at times" :oldlol:

kawhileonard2 makes much more intelligent posts than you do. Fact.

Truth hurts.

:lebroncry:

[Lebron23]

Durant is a beta

[Charlie Sheen]

danko's takes on KD are about as delusional as his Messi takes in the soccer thread. :facepalm KD made the Warriors unbeatable. Before that they were at worst, the second best team in the entire league.

He very obviously starts with the conclusion and then searches for evidence to match that conclusion. It is backwards...and that explains the incorrect application of statistics he does not really understand like ON/OFF

[SouBeachTalents]

4 pages in and not a single poster has agreed with OP. That's a rarity on ISH :lol

[dankok8]

4 pages in and not a single poster has agreed with OP. That's a rarity on ISH :lol

Plenty of people agreed with me once they understood what I'm trying to say.

What threw people off is the subjective term "needed". Needed to win a championship vs. need to be a historic dynasty. I obviously meant the latter but we spent pages until y'all understood what I meant.

Either way I think KD doesn't get enough credit for 2017 and 2018. And I say that even though I think his move was weak because he played amazingly well and actually made them better. That much cannot be disputed.

[1987_Lakers]

Plenty of people agreed with me once they understood what I'm trying to say.

Who are these imaginary people? Same "people" you used to rig a poll against LeBron?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Don't agree with dankok at all.

The Warriors didn't need KD and could've replaced him with most all-star wings. We just saw that with Wiggins, who up until last year had never been a star.

That being said, some of yall treat OP like a troll. :lol As if he's never made a good post or something. Dude has brought legit bangers on here, and actually attempts to talk ball. Far cry from some lol

[SouBeachTalents]

Plenty of people agreed with me once they understood what I'm trying to say.

What threw people off is the subjective term "needed". Needed to win a championship vs. need to be a historic dynasty. I obviously meant the latter but we spent pages until y'all understood what I meant.

Either way I think KD doesn't get enough credit for 2017 and 2018. And I say that even though I think his move was weak because he played amazingly well and actually made them better. That much cannot be disputed.
He did play very well and for sure made them better, arguably the greatest team ever. But when Harrison Barnes & Andrew Wiggins are literally winning titles in your spot, your titles just aren't going to hold much significance historically. He was legitimately replaceable with far worse players, which is unprecedented for ATG's winning titles in their prime.

[RRR3]

Don't agree with dankok at all.

The Warriors didn't need KD and could've replaced him with most all-star wings. We just saw that with Wiggins, who up until last year had never been a star.

That being said, some of yall treat OP like a troll. :lol As if he's never made a good post or something. Dude has brought legit bangers on here, and actually attempts to talk ball. Far cry from some lol
Not a troll but biased with some bad takes. Which I guess for ISH standards makes him an elite poster :lol

[dankok8]

He did play very well and for sure made them better, arguably the greatest team ever. But when Harrison Barnes & Andrew Wiggins are literally winning titles in your spot, your titles just aren't going to hold much significance historically. He was legitimately replaceable with far worse players, which is unprecedented for ATG's winning titles in their prime.

I still think those titles should hold significance. Obviously not as much as if he won in OKC or somewhere else but he won two rings as the co-best player.

Also worth noting:

The 2015 Warriors won with Harrison Barnes but against a much weaker team in the finals.

The 2022 Warriors won with Wiggins but against much weaker competition in general.

The four Warriors rings aren't equal in difficulty. The 2018 and 2017 rings, in that order, were the two most difficult ones in terms of strength of competition faced.

[RRR3]

I still think those titles should hold significance. Obviously not as much as if he won in OKC or somewhere else but he won two rings as the co-best player.

Also worth noting:

The 2015 Warriors won with Harrison Barnes but against a much weaker team in the finals.

The 2022 Warriors won with Wiggins but against much weaker competition in general.

The four Warriors rings aren't equal in difficulty. The 2018 and 2017 rings, in that order, were the two most difficult ones in terms of strength of competition faced.
He was never as good as Curry.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Not a troll but biased with some bad takes. Which I guess for ISH standards makes him an elite poster :lol

That bar is like Jokic's vert. You're right about that.

[SouBeachTalents]

I still think those titles should hold significance. Obviously not as much as if he won in OKC or somewhere else but he won two rings as the co-best player.

Also worth noting:

The 2015 Warriors won with Harrison Barnes but against a much weaker team in the finals.

The 2022 Warriors won with Wiggins but against much weaker competition in general.

The four Warriors rings aren't equal in difficulty. The 2018 and 2017 rings, in that order, were the two most difficult ones in terms of strength of competition faced.
They beat one elite team in both those title runs, the Cavs in 2017 & the Rockets the next year. The Warriors & Cavs had a series that literally came down to the final minute of Game 7 the year before, then one of them added peak KD and won pretty easily, so not really a surprising result there :lol I believe they could've won that series with a clearly worse all-star caliber player in his place, or a couple of very good supporting players. Saying they needed KD to win that series when they were 1-2 plays from winning the year before without him is a pretty unjustifiable position imo, and where we honestly just disagree.

2018 is your best argument, but again, this is a very difficult hypothetical because the Warriors outside the Big 3+ Iggy would've looked a lot different, so whether or not they beat Houston, esp with CP3 missing the final 2 games, is pure speculation.

I honestly wouldn't consider their runs with KD to be noticeably more difficult than 2022, esp factoring in their ridiculous margin of error talent wise.

[dankok8]

They beat one elite team in both those title runs, the Cavs in 2017 & the Rockets the next year. The Warriors & Cavs had a series that literally came down to the final minute of Game 7 the year before, then one of them added peak KD and won pretty easily, so not really a surprising result there :lol I believe they could've won that series with a clearly worse all-star caliber player in his place, or a couple of very good supporting players. Saying they needed KD to win that series when they were 1-2 plays from winning the year before without him is a pretty unjustifiable position imo, and where we honestly just disagree.

2018 is your best argument, but again, this is a very difficult hypothetical because the Warriors outside the Big 3+ Iggy would've looked a lot different, so whether or not they beat Houston, esp with CP3 missing the final 2 games, is pure speculation.

I honestly wouldn't consider their runs with KD to be noticeably more difficult than 2022, esp factoring in their ridiculous margin of error talent wise.

2017 Cavs and 2018 Rockets are clearly better than any team the 2015 Warriors and 2022 Warriors beat in the playoffs. Do you agree or disagree?

[tpols]

I still think those titles should hold significance. Obviously not as much as if he won in OKC or somewhere else but he won two rings as the co-best player.

Also worth noting:

The 2015 Warriors won with Harrison Barnes but against a much weaker team in the finals.

The 2022 Warriors won with Wiggins but against much weaker competition in general.

The four Warriors rings aren't equal in difficulty. The 2018 and 2017 rings, in that order, were the two most difficult ones in terms of strength of competition faced.

I'm really struggling to comprehend this point.

I get 2015. Kyrie and Love were out. There ŵere some injuries in the west.

2022 though? The Warriors ran through Jokic Nuggets, Morant Grizzlies, Luka Mavs, and then the stacked Tatum Brown Celtics. Of which the Celtics had them on the ropes.

How is that a weak path?


You know it's funny... I think you're just trying to be a smartass contrarion. Because NONE of your analysis lines up with reality.

[SouBeachTalents]

2017 Cavs and 2018 Rockets are clearly better than any team the 2015 Warriors and 2022 Warriors beat in the playoffs. Do you agree or disagree?
I would agree those are the 2 best teams they beat during their 4 title runs. But as an overall run do I think those 2 were more difficult than 2022? I honestly think they were relatively comparable. 2015 was weak for sure.

[FilmyCogTurner]

Plenty of people agreed with me once they understood what I'm trying to say.

What threw people off is the subjective term "needed". Needed to win a championship vs. need to be a historic dynasty. I obviously meant the latter but we spent pages until y'all understood what I meant.

Either way I think KD doesn't get enough credit for 2017 and 2018. And I say that even though I think his move was weak because he played amazingly well and actually made them better. That much cannot be disputed.

This is crazy talk.. Warriors already have two seasons of back to back finals appearances before adding KD. They could have easily been in the same position for the following two seasons and WON with no Durant and someone else in his place, the difference would be the margins were slimmer.

[dankok8]

Guys about 2022..

The Nuggets were missing both Murray and MPJ.

The Grizz had Morant injured.

Luka Mavs were a weak conference final team that happened to upset Phoenix.

I'll give you Boston as a good team but historically that's still a relatively weak opponent. Still that's the only time they were actually tested.


I would agree those are the 2 best teams they beat during their 4 title runs. But as an overall run do I think those 2 were more difficult than 2022? I honestly think they were relatively comparable. 2015 was weak for sure.

Overall runs are pretty much as difficult as the toughest team you have to face. 2022 Celtics are good but nowhere near 2017 Cavs or 2018 Rockets.

[brownmamba00]

Whenever I see KD talk nowadays I just cringe. How are you the best scorer ever but you get chased out of the team by Draymond mfing Green.

Awkward looking ass real life Drake fanboy.

[r0drig0lac]

but...that's all.

[Wally450]

A 73 win team "needed" him, makes sense.

But look at the on/off!!

[HoopsNY]

Guys about 2022..

The Nuggets were missing both Murray and MPJ.

The Grizz had Morant injured.

Luka Mavs were a weak conference final team that happened to upset Phoenix.

I'll give you Boston as a good team but historically that's still a relatively weak opponent. Still that's the only time they were actually tested.



Overall runs are pretty much as difficult as the toughest team you have to face. 2022 Celtics are good but nowhere near 2017 Cavs or 2018 Rockets.

The 2022 Celtics had the second greatest Net Rating of all time in the regular season. They had six players that received All-Defensive votes. I'm not sure that ever happened in history with any other team.

I also disagree that the Warriors couldn't return in 2017 and 2018 to win it all. We don't know who they would have replaced Barnes with, and Paul got injured and missed game 6 and 7 in 2018. It's entirely possible they beat Cleveland both years.

[dankok8]

The 2022 Celtics had the second greatest Net Rating of all time in the regular season. They had six players that received All-Defensive votes. I'm not sure that ever happened in history with any other team.

I also disagree that the Warriors couldn't return in 2017 and 2018 to win it all. We don't know who they would have replaced Barnes with, and Paul got injured and missed game 6 and 7 in 2018. It's entirely possible they beat Cleveland both years.

Like I said the Celtics were a good team. Still would much rather face them over the 2017 Cavs or 2018 Rockets in a playoff series.

Funny enough arguably no player in NBA history is held to the same level of scrutiny as Durant. You can make a case that a lot of teams would win a title if you replaced their best (or co-best) player with someone else. It's a weak argument IMHO.

[hold this L]

He has played with more elite talent than anyone in NBA history and only has 2 titles, but he is the most scrutinized player ever? Somebody get the violin out guys, poor KD has had it rough out there.

[RRR3]

Like I said the Celtics were a good team. Still would much rather face them over the 2017 Cavs or 2018 Rockets in a playoff series.

Funny enough arguably no player in NBA history is held to the same level of scrutiny as Durant. You can make a case that a lot of teams would win a title if you replaced their best (or co-best) player with someone else. It's a weak argument IMHO.
Does LeBron not exist?

What reality do you live in?

[dankok8]

Does LeBron not exist?

What reality do you live in?

Does Lebron get the "his team would have won with someone else" treatment? That's the lowest of the low when it comes to arguments.

Either way KD gets too much flak. You can call him a beta and criticize his weak move to the Warriors (I do...) but still give him credit for playing really well for two title teams.

[HoopsNY]

Like I said the Celtics were a good team. Still would much rather face them over the 2017 Cavs or 2018 Rockets in a playoff series.

Funny enough arguably no player in NBA history is held to the same level of scrutiny as Durant. You can make a case that a lot of teams would win a title if you replaced their best (or co-best) player with someone else. It's a weak argument IMHO.

Boston wasn't just a good team. They were a great team. You're completely underrating them. Second highest Net Rating of all time and led the league in SRS should qualify them as being a great team.

I respectfully disagree with your assessment. I do think GS could have beaten the Warriors in 2017. 2018 might have been a little bit different, but it would have been subject to who they got to replace Barnes after 2016.

[RRR3]

Does Lebron get the "his team would have won with someone else" treatment? That's the lowest of the low when it comes to arguments.

Either way KD gets too much flak. You can call him a beta and criticize his weak move to the Warriors (I do...) but still give him credit for playing really well for two title teams.
Yes in Miami LeBron did and does get that argument :hammerhead:
Even though the data doesn’t support it in his case.

[Charlie Sheen]

Does Lebron get the "his team would have won with someone else" treatment? That's the lowest of the low when it comes to arguments.

Either way KD gets too much flak. You can call him a beta and criticize his weak move to the Warriors (I do...) but still give him credit for playing really well for two title teams.

Not identically that but... Lebron would not have even made the Finals if he was playing in the West.

And I bet if someone looked hard enough there would be examples of you saying that very thing.

[dankok8]

Boston wasn't just a good team. They were a great team. You're completely underrating them. Second highest Net Rating of all time and led the league in SRS should qualify them as being a great team.

I respectfully disagree with your assessment. I do think GS could have beaten the Warriors in 2017. 2018 might have been a little bit different, but it would have been subject to who they got to replace Barnes after 2016.

What do you mean by second highest Net Rating of all time? Their SRS was only 7 which is good but nothing special.

[HoopsNY]

What do you mean by second highest Net Rating of all time? Their SRS was only 7 which is good but nothing special.

Sorry, I was thinking of point differential. Boston's point differential was +12.2, I think Chicago's was +12.3 in 1996. The top 4 that I saw listed were Chicago (1996), Boston (2022), Golden State (2017), and Chicago (1997). I do believe that's a significant stat.

https://i.ibb.co/j8jPWz2/Celtics-Point-Differential.jpg (https://ibb.co/x2rtfY0)

[1987_Lakers]

Sorry, I was thinking of point differential. Boston's point differential was +12.2, I think Chicago's was +12.3 in 1996. The top 4 that I saw listed were Chicago (1996), Boston (2022), Golden State (2017), and Chicago (1997). I do believe that's a significant stat.

https://i.ibb.co/j8jPWz2/Celtics-Point-Differential.jpg (https://ibb.co/x2rtfY0)

What? Boston was a solid Finals team, but their point differential was not that high. :oldlol:

It was at +7.3

[HoopsNY]

What? Boston was a solid Finals team, but their point differential was not that high. :oldlol:

It was at +7.3

Hmm, you're right. I remember seeing this before and thinking it was odd. I stand corrected and agree with dankok then. He has a point.

[SouBeachTalents]

Like I said the Celtics were a good team. Still would much rather face them over the 2017 Cavs or 2018 Rockets in a playoff series.

Funny enough arguably no player in NBA history is held to the same level of scrutiny as Durant. You can make a case that a lot of teams would win a title if you replaced their best (or co-best) player with someone else. It's a weak argument IMHO.
Your arguments are flawed for 2 reasons

1. You keep acting like a team that won 140 games, a championship, and was a minute away from another, a team that had a top 15 player ever at his peak and two other All-NBA players in their prime, couldn't have won without another top 20 player ever on the roster.

The Warriors track record without Durant speaks for itself, 2 championships, another Finals, and the most wins in a regular season. I said it before, but if Harrison Barnes doesn't have the worst shooting stretch of his career in the Finals they literally would have won b2b with him in KD's spot. A slight upgrade at that position is very well all the Warriors could've needed to win again, which they did later on with Wiggins.

2. No other ATG/top 25 player ever saw the team he was on win a championship before he got there, then win another one after he left. Nothing compares to KD's situation, it was unprecedented, so acting like it's some unfair criticism to make of him when we literally have proof of FAR inferior guys like Wiggins & Barnes winning in his place is absurd.

I know you claimed others have agreed with you, but honestly, nobody else has. You're entitled to believe what you'd like, but based on the responses in this thread you are in the extreme minority on this issue.

[dankok8]

Your arguments are flawed for 2 reasons

1. You keep acting like a team that won 140 games, a championship, and was a minute away from another, a team that had a top 15 player ever at his peak and two other All-NBA players in their prime, couldn't have won without another top 20 player ever on the roster.

The Warriors track record without Durant speaks for itself, 2 championships, another Finals, and the most wins in a regular season. I said it before, but if Harrison Barnes doesn't have the worst shooting stretch of his career in the Finals they literally would have won b2b with him in KD's spot. A slight upgrade at that position is very well all the Warriors could've needed to win again, which they did later on with Wiggins.

2. No other ATG/top 25 player ever saw the team he was on win a championship before he got there, then win another one after he left. Nothing compares to KD's situation, it was unprecedented, so acting like it's some unfair criticism to make of him when we literally have proof of FAR inferior guys like Wiggins & Barnes winning in his place is absurd.

I know you claimed others have agreed with you, but honestly, nobody else has. You're entitled to believe what you'd like, but based on the responses in this thread you are in the extreme minority on this issue.

Those other two titles are won against weaker competition. That's the part you refuse to acknowledge.

The 2015 and 2022 titles aren't the same as the 2017 and 2018 titles. You are making a false equivalency. Not to mention the 2017 team just steamrolled their way to a ring going 16-1 (twelve wins by double digits and the one loss after up 3-0) and many consider them the GOAT team. KD had a big part in that. They wouldn't be a GOAT team without him. KD elevated them to that next level and made them unbeatable as several have said in this thread.

And your post goes back to the regular season. I never claimed (nor does the data show) that the Warriors needed KD in the regular season. In the playoffs though, he gave them a major lift. Give the 2017 and 2018 Warriors Barnes or Wiggins and I'm not sure whatsoever they win those titles. In the postseason the Warriors were much better with KD.

As for Barnes shooting poorly yep but had Kyrie and Love been healthy in 2015, it's very possible that series ends differently too. And had a few opponents like the Nuggets and Grizzlies been healthy in 2022, that title is a bit of a question mark as well.

[Charlie Sheen]

Why is every title without KD weaker competition? Why does context matter only for those years? KD leaving a contender IN THE SAME CONFERENCE does not make the dubs path easier? They gain him while not having to face him.

[SouBeachTalents]

Those other two titles are won against weaker competition. That's the part you refuse to acknowledge.

The 2015 and 2022 titles aren't the same as the 2017 and 2018 titles. You are making a false equivalency. Not to mention the 2017 team just steamrolled their way to a ring going 16-1 (twelve wins by double digits and the one loss after up 3-0) and many consider them the GOAT team. KD had a big part in that. They wouldn't be a GOAT team without him. KD elevated them to that next level and made them unbeatable as several have said in this thread.

And your post goes back to the regular season. I never claimed (nor does the data show) that the Warriors needed KD in the regular season. In the playoffs though, he gave them a major lift. Give the 2017 and 2018 Warriors Barnes or Wiggins and I'm not sure whatsoever they win those titles. In the postseason the Warriors were much better with KD.

As for Barnes shooting poorly yep but had Kyrie and Love been healthy in 2015, it's very possible that series ends differently too. And had a few opponents like the Nuggets and Grizzlies been healthy in 2022, that title is a bit of a question mark as well.
Bro, not a single person in this thread has disputed that KD didn't make them better :lol That's not the discussion being had here. They went from championship team to arguably the greatest team ever when he got there. But again, this is not what's being discussed.

You're arguing this team that was the championship favorite without KD was incapable of winning without him, which they have proven to do over and over and over again. And I honestly disagree with '17 & '18 being so much more difficult. They frankly had 3 easy opponents in those title runs, so your entire argument hinges on them being incapable of beating a Cavs team they took down to the wire the year before, and a Rockets team that was missing it's 2nd best player the final 2 games of the series.

They absolutely could've beaten Cleveland in 2017, and yeah, I'd probably pick Houston to beat them, but as I said before, the supporting cast would've looked a lot different by that point. You've acted throughout the thread like the only option for them was to add KD or stay put, but if they didn't add KD, they very easily could've added another all-star to join their current 3, or sign 2-3 good supporting players instead.

So predicting how this series with a different team involved plays out is pure speculation, and to say so assuredly that peak Steph with 2 other all-stars, maybe even 3, couldn't have won during these years is frankly a ridiculous take. ESP when you factor in he's done this multiple times now.

[Axe]

Bro, not a single person in this thread has disputed that KD didn't make them better :lol That's not the discussion that's being had here. They went from championship team to arguably the greatest team ever when he got there. But again, this is not what's being discussed.

You're arguing this team that was the championship favorite without KD was incapable of winning without him, which they have proven over and over and over again. And I frankly disagree with '17 & '18 being so much more difficult. They frankly had 3 easy opponents in those title runs, so your entire argument hinges on them being incapable of beating a Cavs team they took down to the wire the year before, and a Rockets team that was missing it's 2nd best player the final 2 games of the series.

They absolutely could've beaten Cleveland in 2017, and yeah, I'd pick Houston to beat them, but as I said before, the supporting cast would've looked a lot different by that point. You've acted throughout the thread like the only option for them was to add KD or stay put, but if they didn't add KD, they very easily could've added another all-star to join their current 3, or sign 2-3 good supporting players instead. So predicting how this series with a different team involved plays out is pure speculation, and to say so assuredly that peak Steph with 2 other all-stars, maybe even 3, couldn't have won during these years is frankly a ridiculous take. ESP when you factor in he's done this multiple times now.
Damn, this post just proves how overwhelmingly stacked chef gerbil's team really is. And not just on paper alone unlike some other teams out there. That's why it's such a joy to see them lose in the postseason from time to time.

[dankok8]

Bro, not a single person in this thread has disputed that KD didn't make them better :lol That's not the discussion being had here. They went from championship team to arguably the greatest team ever when he got there. But again, this is not what's being discussed.

You're arguing this team that was the championship favorite without KD was incapable of winning without him, which they have proven to do over and over and over again. And I honestly disagree with '17 & '18 being so much more difficult. They frankly had 3 easy opponents in those title runs, so your entire argument hinges on them being incapable of beating a Cavs team they took down to the wire the year before, and a Rockets team that was missing it's 2nd best player the final 2 games of the series.

They absolutely could've beaten Cleveland in 2017, and yeah, I'd probably pick Houston to beat them, but as I said before, the supporting cast would've looked a lot different by that point. You've acted throughout the thread like the only option for them was to add KD or stay put, but if they didn't add KD, they very easily could've added another all-star to join their current 3, or sign 2-3 good supporting players instead.

So predicting how this series with a different team involved plays out is pure speculation, and to say so assuredly that peak Steph with 2 other all-stars, maybe even 3, couldn't have won during these years is frankly a ridiculous take. ESP when you factor in he's done this multiple times now.

I didn't say they were incapable of winning without him but that it's doubtful they would win the 2017 and 2018 titles without KD. Say they kept Harrison Barnes. I could easily see the Warriors going ringless in 2017 and 2018. We don't know for sure but it wouldn't surprise me.

Of course if they added another all-star that could change... A lot of teams could win if you replaced their star with a lesser star. Heck the 2017 and 2018 Warriors could win titles if you replaced Curry with a lesser player say CP3. And? That hypothetical doesn't diminish Curry's value so such arguments shouldn't diminish KD's value.

[Charlie Sheen]

Bro, not a single person in this thread has disputed that KD didn't make them better :lol That's not the discussion being had here. They went from championship team to arguably the greatest team ever when he got there. But again, this is not what's being discussed.

You're arguing this team that was the championship favorite without KD was incapable of winning without him, which they have proven to do over and over and over again. And I honestly disagree with '17 & '18 being so much more difficult. They frankly had 3 easy opponents in those title runs, so your entire argument hinges on them being incapable of beating a Cavs team they took down to the wire the year before, and a Rockets team that was missing it's 2nd best player the final 2 games of the series.

They absolutely could've beaten Cleveland in 2017, and yeah, I'd probably pick Houston to beat them, but as I said before, the supporting cast would've looked a lot different by that point. You've acted throughout the thread like the only option for them was to add KD or stay put, but if they didn't add KD, they very easily could've added another all-star to join their current 3, or sign 2-3 good supporting players instead.

So predicting how this series with a different team involved plays out is pure speculation, and to say so assuredly that peak Steph with 2 other all-stars, maybe even 3, couldn't have won during these years is frankly a ridiculous take. ESP when you factor in he's done this multiple times now.

:applause:

The op colors it black and white...


it's very doubtful the Warriors win any titles in this span without KD. The narrative that he was the cherry on top is misguided.

Either KD is irreplaceable and the reason GSW won or you believe he was a "cherry on top". No middle ground for being reasonable. He has 2 FMVPs...Nobody ever said KD was not a key contributor.

Value is relative to the environment and no matter how many ways you try to explain this to OP he will bury his head in the sand and ramble on about this point nobody understands because they dont see the game through the lens of ON/OFF like the does.

Disagree and he will draw whatever what if scenarios he can dream up to slant this imagined reality as proof why the Warriors could not win without KD.

[StrongLurk]

Idk why so many people discredit KD's rings WHILE ALSO claiming Steph has four rings. You either discredit - "devalue" - those rings for both of them or for neither of them.

At least KD proved he could go toe to toe with Lebron. Steph never managed to do that.

[ILLsmak]

That being said, some of yall treat OP like a troll. :lol As if he's never made a good post or something. Dude has brought legit bangers on here, and actually attempts to talk ball. Far cry from some lol

It's a troll thread tho.

-Smak

[warriorfan]

It's a troll thread tho.

-Smak

:lol

[8Ball]

Idk why so many people discredit KD's rings WHILE ALSO claiming Steph has four rings. You either discredit - "devalue" - those rings for both of them or for neither of them.

At least KD proved he could go toe to toe with Lebron. Steph never managed to do that.

Steph proved his worth in the league. He won 2 rings as the best player of his team without Durant.


Durant only won rings when he had a 60+ win team without him.


Would the 2017 Warriors without Durant win 60+ games? If they kept Harrison Barnes, most likely yes. Would they have won the championship? Probably not against the 2017 Cavs. But they would still have been the 2nd best team in the league in 2017.

And lose against Houston in 2018.

[3ba11]

The Curry Warriors were only a little better than the 07' Mavs or 09' Magic and similarly got exposed for being thin on talent - Klay Thompson was never drafted to be a "franchise player" and has been a supplementary producer for his entire career - he's one of the best spot-up shooters ever, but he's also one of the most one-dimensional "stars" ever as well - he's a rich man's Korver, which is good enough for HOF when paired with Curry but should never be expected to beat a Lebron super-team as the preseason odds show - a Klay Thompson-led cast was underdog to Lebron's super-team casts on paper (preseason)