Julius Erving vs Kevin Durant

My biggest issue with KD isn't really talent based, it's more things like intangibles and leadership which don't show up on the basketball reference stat pages. He's not lacking in ability compared to, like, 95% of anyone whose ever played but it is telling that the only chips he won( and looking like he will ever win) came in the context of a system where he could just 'ball' and not have the pressures of leadership and galvanizing the lockerroom. He was like the worlds best insurance policy and exponentially increased the margin of error that Warriors team had.

[QUOTE=iamgine;14969084]People being intellectually dishonest trying to sound smart...I agree with that.[/QUOTE]

No, it's not trying to sound smart. It's just coming up with arguments that would at least pass the critical thinking skills of a 5 year old. Try harder.

[QUOTE=Phoenix;14969085]My biggest issue with KD isn't really talent based, it's more things like intangibles and leadership which don't show up on the basketball reference stat pages. He's not lacking in ability compared to, like, 95% of anyone whose ever played but it is telling that the only chips he won( and looking like he will ever win) came in the context of a system where he could just 'ball' and not have the pressures of leadership and galvanizing the lockerroom. He was like the worlds best insurance policy and exponentially increased the margin of error that Warriors team had.[/QUOTE]

That's a legit issue. One of my problems with him as well. I believe Dr. J was a better leader, Barkley credits Dr. J for making him grow up. Funny enough, both Dr. J & Durant never won NBA titles as the #1 guy. Dr. J needed Moses who was a better player at that point to join the Sixers to finally win a title, Durant even though he won FMVP joined a stacked Warriors team where Curry is seen as the better player.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14969083]The drop off in production from the ABA to the NBA is too jarring to ignore. He went from 29/12/5 to 24/7/4 before Moses got there, and he joined the NBA at 26 so you can't possibly blame it on age or decline. I'm confident KD could've won 3 MVP's too if his biggest competition in the league was Artis Gilmore & Bobby Jones.

I think you can make a reasonable argument for Dr. J, but based strictly off NBA performance, it'd be hard to not take KD.[/QUOTE]
Everyone's from the ABA to NBA dropped. ABA played a faster pace of ball than the NBA at that time.
The drop off in production is moot because he STILL takes the Sixers to 3 Finals. You know how many teams went to the Finals 3 times from 77-82? The Sixers.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14969097]That's a legit issue. One of my problems with him as well. I believe Dr. J was a better leader, Barkley credits Dr. J for making him grow up. Funny enough, both Dr. J & Durant never won NBA titles as the #1 guy. Dr. J needed Moses who was a better player at that point to join the Sixers to finally win a title, Durant even though he won FMVP joined a stacked Warriors team where Curry is seen as the better player.[/QUOTE]

It feels a bit weird to say but it kinda feels like KD has slightly under-achieved relative to his talent. Oh he'll play for 20 years and amass tons of points and all-nba awards and the like, but it just feels to me like a single MVP award and (likely final count) 2 titles won under the circumstances he won doesn't align with his talent and ability. It goes back to the intangibles argument, at some point how you apply your skills and how your team feeds off them and vice versa is as important as the skills themselves. Like, I think KD may be a more gifted talent than Duncan but Timmy ended up being so much greater as a leader and winner with GOAT intangibles, and it's not like KD hasn't always played with all-nba level talent through his career.

[QUOTE=Phoenix;14969087]No, it's not trying to sound smart. It's just coming up with arguments that would at least pass the critical thinking skills of a 5 year old. Try harder.[/QUOTE]
It really is.

[QUOTE=iamgine;14969184]It really is.[/QUOTE]

No, it really isn't.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14969097]That's a legit issue. One of my problems with him as well. I believe Dr. J was a better leader, Barkley credits Dr. J for making him grow up. Funny enough, both Dr. J & Durant never won NBA titles as the #1 guy. Dr. J needed Moses who was a better player at that point to join the Sixers to finally win a title, Durant even though he won FMVP joined a stacked Warriors team where Curry is seen as the better player.[/QUOTE]

Of course Dr J was a better leader and not a huge b!tch coward like Durant.

But as for the better player, it's clearly Durant.

this is actually a very interesting comparison

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14969081]This is false, Sixers had the #6 ranked offense in '77 which is good, but they were not some offensive juggernaut. Durant actually joined a team with a historic offense and was still putting up more points than Erving. In '79, the Sixers had one of the worst offenses in the league and Dr. J only averaged 23 PPG. Other than his rookie year when he was 19 years old, KD never had a season where he averaged that low in points.

Dr. J played 3 NBA seasons in the 70's, only one of those years did he make All-NBA First Team. Even to call him the 2nd best player in the late 70's behind Kareem is a stretch. Walton when healthy was clearly better, hell you could even make a case for George Gervin being better during the late 70's.[/QUOTE]

The Sixers lacked a PG and other than Dawkins and Erving, the others guys were negatives on defense. It was just a poorly constructed team with lots of scorers until about 1980 when Cheeks, Bobby Jones, Toney etc. came on and a cohesive and balanced team was formed. 1st Team All-NBA isn't a good criterion to measure greatness. Kareem himself wasn't 1st Team for a few years in the 70's. So what... he was still the best in the world.