Seriously how can you compare the two? One is a defensive specialist and rebounder, the other is a freak of nature scoring machine. Regardless, both are and will be amazing players. Personally I think we made the right choice, because DEFENSE wins championships, not scoring titles. Also, Keep in mind that in the past 2 decades the championship teams were usually top 4 in most the major defensive categories. I take D over O anyday, especially knowing we already have plenty of scorers.
Well currently, it's obvious Durant has been doing amazingly. But I think in the long run, we will be much better off with the Beast Down Low. I mean just his presence this season has altered more shots than I ever remembered a Blazer single handedly done.
Exactly... For example. T-Mac is a scoring machine, but has never lead his team past the first round of the play-offs. Ben Wallace couldn't shoot a basket if his life depended on him, but his defensive anchor and energy made a huge impact on the success of the ball club. Now keep in mind that Ben Wallace is about 4 inches shorter and has less talent than Oden. I think Oden will win us more games than Durant will 10 fold. Why? Well we don't need scoring. We need a defensive identity. I am starting to realize this more and more. I even think Oden has accepted this and slowly but surely we will be handing teams their ass.
I like Greg, I'm happy he's starting to show that he can be something of a difference maker on the court, but let's get real here. Durant is probably going to win the MVP a couple of times before it's all said and done. Be honest, if OKC had Greg and they were the ones enduring all of the false starts and setbacks he's gone through his first two years. People here would be crowing about the fact that we've got three unstoppable scoring options and Clay Bennett was being punished for moving the Sonics.
Well honestly, I have some doubt in that. Remember that Dominique Wilkens was a phenom scorer. He was supposed to be the best PF to ever play the game. Look where it got him? Also keep in mind that other players like Ben Wallace, Tim Duncan and many others that are defensive playmakers are champions, while superstud scorers like T-mac, Carter and countless others couldn't even lead their respected teams past the second round. I hold my opinion until we see a full season with a fully healthy Oden. I think those "set-backs" are behind us now (crossing fingers) and we can truly see the value of a defensive leader on the floor.
I somehow suspect Durant is going to become a pretty damn good defender in time ... he seems to have that weird combo of extreme physical gifts and obsessive work ethic that molds great scorers into all-around talents. Time as always will tell. Secondly, Tim Duncan is/was an elite two way player able to dominate the glass, the paint and the ability to score on anyone from the low block. Ben Wallace was part of something of an anomaly in the NBA -- the no superstars, five really good players phenomena -- that netted the Pistons exactly one championship before it kind of fell apart and they weren't a championship contender until they added Sheed. In any case, my only point wasn't that Oden is somehow a terrible player, but I'm constantly amazed that Blazers fans think Oden vs. Durant is still a debate from an individual talent standpoint ... and I'd argue that a team consisting of Roy, Durant, LMA (and Pryz anchoring the middle) is quite a bit more potent the the current team we field ... at least for now.
Okay I concede with your new post. As individual performance goes, I think Durant is a better player. I still would be suspect on Durant co-existing with Roy and LMA, especially seeing the problems they already have with Nate trying to give Oden the ball more offensively. It was like "Hey man?!?!?! Where's my shots?" May not be true at all, but I think eventually this could pan out to be the much better bet.
Do you mean better player right now, or best "talent" (which, to me, implies the player who will be better in their prime/peak)? I think Durant might be the better player right now (though the massive difference on defense might be just as great as the difference on offense). Scoring is important, but tends to get overstated a bit, while defense and rebounding (cliches about "what wins championships" aside) tend to get short shrift in actual evaluations. I think the two are much closer right now than most would think looking at the "slash stats" (PPG/RPG/APG). If Oden ever develops a consistently good scoring game, he'll be far and away more valuable. I felt Oden was the right decision at the time and I continue to think so. I don't think I'm generally a homer for the Blazers or their players, but bias may be a factor. Defense can be quite subjective. I should note, though, that I've never felt negatively toward Durant and I have always thought he was a truly elite talent and should be a top player in the league. I feel no need to tear Durant down, but I sincerely feel that the Blazers got the better player...the only problem is minutes per game (which should be counted). If Oden played the minutes Durant did, I think he'd be at least as valuable. As it is, I think they're close in impact on the floor but Durant is more valuable due to the greater number of minutes.
You are also forgetting the player that did it. Are you saying Durant is the next Jordan? I don't believe that for a minute. And remember that "Bulls Dynasty had 6 players that were all NBA defense, which holds true to the defense is the main ingredient for championships.
I don't think my comments were really aimed at you (and people of a similar mind) I'm directing them more toward the crowd who seemingly need to slag Durant or downplay him as some means of propping Oden up -- frankly I think Oden was a fine choice between the two players and given enough time and enough work might eventually become an impact player at both ends of the court, but I get tired of reading what seems like people talking themselves into the choice. It's almost like people really are worried about some kind of Sam Bowie vs. Jordan scenario repeating itself when in reality it's probably more like choosing between (potential) Jordan and (potential) Ben Wallace with more height -- and maybe eventually more offensive game.
Yes it probably would be Durant, but I don't think it's a screwup. Greg definitely is a difference maker on defense and he's still young enough and has enough room for growth to probably be an all-star caliber player in a couple more years.
Scoring leaders (plain, ordinary PPG) have been champions in... (since the merger...) 1999-2000 (Shaq) 1995/1996 - 1997/1998 (Jordan) 1991/1992 - 1993/1994 (Jordan... David Robinson won it in '94/'95) ...or a whopping 17% of the time. The only player to do it not named Michael Jordan was Shaquille O'Neal, in what was his best individual year (based on PER). http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/pts_per_g_yearly.html
The only factor that concerns me at all with Oden of course is injuries. As long as he stays healthy I'd take him over Durant.
Let us not forget that OKC is the Durant show. GO has a much more strictly defined role on this team and one that is pretty limited. I also don't think we've seen Oden at 100% yet. His teammates don't know how to play with him on offense and our guards are still letting him be the last line of defense as they blow by our backcourt. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Durant will have all the individual accolades and Oden will win all the titles.
