Stylizer1
SENSimillanaire
Similar, but there’s 2 key differences.
1) joining the team that beat you in the western conference finals, when you had them up 3-1. As a fan, that goes against the fundamental spirit of competitiveness I love about professional sports
2) joining a team that had enough team chemistry to win 73 games. The Heat weren’t established and had to build
Don’t get me wrong, I didn’t like LeBron’s move to Miami either, felt he was above that. LeBron in a way created the monster that was Durant on Golden State.
The season before the Warriors got Durant Lebron was complaining to the media that Gilbert had to add another superstar to compete against GS. The rumor was he wanted Carmelo Anthony. That's why the Warriors signed Durant. Cleveland already had LeBron, Love , and Irving and wanted to add another superstar. Cleveland needed a top level coach not a superstar but LeBron got his man in Tyron Lue who was a sock puppet.
We live in the era where every kid gets a trophy. It's only logical that all the "superstars" win a championship too. So many superstars didn't win a championship in the 80's, 90's, 00's because of the Lakers, Celtics, Bulls, and the Spurs and they were okay with it. Those 4 teams won 23 of the 30 championships. In today's era it doesn't matter how you got one as long as you get one. Golden state was that team that was going to shut out this generation of superstars.
OKC would have been a super team built the right way if they would have just waited for there time. Westbrook, Harden, Durant, Ibaka would have made Curry, Thompson and Green look very bad. It just wasn't their time yet.