Dragging mediocre teams to the playoffs is less impressive and less a sign of greatness than working well and fluidly with other elite talent.
But he's done both so shouldn't that highlight even more so how amazing he is?
Dragging mediocre teams to the playoffs is less impressive and less a sign of greatness than working well and fluidly with other elite talent.
But he's done both so shouldn't that highlight even more so how amazing he is?
Yep, if Westbrook had actually trusted those guys instead of trying to do everything his way they could've made a little noise. He had Oladipo, Sabonis, Adams, Kanter on that squad.This team wayy worse than that squad Westbrook had. He really underachieved with that roster in all honesty
no it wasntThat's my point. What he did with KD is underappreciated, just like what Wade did with Lebron and Tim Duncan did with Miscellaneous players. To be able to adjust your game, still put up great numbers, and win championships is a sign of basketball intelligence.
no it wasnt
that shyt was easy
im more impressed with what he is doing now
Let's take westbrook as an example. He puts up numbers, takes teams to the playoffs. But he never synchronized well with KD, particularly in playoff games.
What superteams have worked? You have examples like the post championship 90's rockets that had Hakeem, Chuck, Pippen and Drexler, 2004 Lakers, and 2011 lakers. People claim they were Larry Holmes status AFTER they lost out, but these teams were hyped when they formed. They failed because the talent didn't work well together.
On the other hand, the 2008 Celtics worked perfectly because of KG
2011 Heat failed, then in 2012 Wade adjusted his game to work better with Lebron.
Great players should be judged for their ability to adapt.
‘04 Lakers and ‘11 Heat both went to the Finals, and the Dream-Clyde-Chuck rockets were a historic Stockton game winner away from being favored in game 7 of the WCF and going to the finals themselves…deeming them failures that didn’t fit because players didn’t adapt is probably a stretch…they were contenders that lost deep playoff series that could’ve went either way…which is all you can ever really hope for…talent gives you that advantage more often than not
bro they went to the finals and were up 3-1 on a 73 win team. shyt was working. replace andre roberson with a half decent shooter and they in da finals again and possibly winning.Let's take westbrook as an example. He puts up numbers, takes teams to the playoffs. But he never synchronized well with KD, particularly in playoff games.
What superteams have worked? You have examples like the post championship 90's rockets that had Hakeem, Chuck, Pippen and Drexler, 2004 Lakers, and 2011 lakers. People claim they were Larry Holmes status AFTER they lost out, but these teams were hyped when they formed. They failed because the talent didn't work well together.
04 lakers wasnt a super team
On the other hand, the 2008 Celtics worked perfectly because of KG
2011 Heat failed, then in 2012 Wade adjusted his game to work better with Lebron.
Great players should be judged for their ability to adapt.
bro they went to the finals and were up 3-1 on a 73 win team. shyt was working. replace andre roberson with a half decent shooter and they in da finals again and possibly winning.
durant just didnt have patience and decided to run from the grind.
i agree that it takes some form of chemistry to have a championship team, but in golden states case that shyt was easy lmao. all they really did was replace barnes with durant. there was nothin to figure out