OKC's lack of greatness is seen by looking at "effort" effect of todays high salaries

Players make 50 times what they used to, so they don't play hard in the regular season anymore, which makes [i]sheer effort[/I] a big advantage and inflates high-winning "effort" teams.. This is why OKC's dominance cratered in the playoffs by almost losing to 2 teams that were 8th and 13th in SRS (Nuggets & Pacers).

So they're barely championship caliber by the slimmest of margins... And the "effort effect" of today's high salaries will continue to inflate the expectation of effort teams that do well in the regular season.

We saw other high energy or high effort teams like the 07' Mavs, 09' Cavs or even the 94' Bulls overachieve the regular season and crater in the playoffs... [I]But none of them got anywhere near the title[/I], so OKC's title as the first "effort" team shows how weak the era has become..

This change from the spoiled and pampered regular season to the playoffs where everyone is playing hard is why my criteria for great teams looks at the playoffs only - my criteria selects teams that won titles by averaging 1 loss per round (4 losses max), or "dynasties" (3 chips in 5 years)... In the 12 instances of these "great teams" occurring in the play-by-play era, highly-assisted bigs or jumpshooters were required at 1st option all 12 times, while low-assisted primary ball-handlers were 0 for 12 in leading these teams.. Ultimately, these 12 great teams were known for great ball movement or systems that requires ELITE off-ball players - this precludes primary ball-handlers from ever producing a great team as 1st option..

Since primary ball-handlers can't produce great teams as the 1st option, they're below the best of other skillsets that can (big & jumpshooters).. This puts ball-dominators like Lebron or Oscar out of the top 10 for anyone that doesn't want them there

SGA proved OP wrong and made him look like a fool per usual.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;15017226]SGA proved OP wrong and made him look like a fool per usual.[/QUOTE]


He literally did the opposite.. But carry on with bad reading comp.. it's a free country and some people subsist by avoiding the truth.. so again, carry on - feel free to think OKC was a great dominant team (that barely beat Mathurin and company)... Riiight buddy.. got it... And I have a bridge to sell you

[QUOTE=3ba11;15017225]Players make 50 times what they used to, so they don't play hard in the regular season anymore, which makes [i]sheer effort[/I] a big advantage and inflates high-winning "effort" teams.. This is why OKC's dominance cratered in the playoffs by almost losing to 2 teams that were 8th and 13th in SRS (Nuggets & Pacers).

So they're barely championship caliber by the slimmest of margins... And the "effort effect" of today's high salaries will continue to inflate the expectation of effort teams that do well in the regular season.

We saw other high energy or high effort teams like the 07' Mavs, 09' Cavs or even the 94' Bulls overachieve the regular season and crater in the playoffs... [I]But none of them got anywhere near the title[/I], so OKC's title as the first "effort" team shows how weak the era has become..

This change from the spoiled and pampered regular season to the playoffs where everyone is playing hard is why my criteria for great teams looks at the playoffs only - my criteria selects teams that won titles by averaging 1 loss per round (4 losses max), or "dynasties" (3 chips in 5 years)... In the 12 instances of these "great teams" occurring in the play-by-play era, highly-assisted bigs or jumpshooters were required at 1st option all 12 times, while low-assisted primary ball-handlers were 0 for 12 in leading these teams.. Ultimately, these 12 great teams were known for great ball movement or systems that requires ELITE off-ball players - this precludes primary ball-handlers from ever producing a great team as 1st option..

Since primary ball-handlers can't produce great teams as the 1st option, they're below the best of other skillsets that can (big & jumpshooters).. T[B]his puts ball-dominators like Lebron or Oscar out of the top 10 for anyone that doesn't want them there[/B][/QUOTE]

And we know you certainly don't want them there. Or at least 1 of them.

OP is the definition of "sore loser". OP is just not a good competitor...