Posted by all3 on 7/7/2013 8:01:00 PM (view original):
If I say I think Golden State has a better team than Houston, am I going to get called nasty names? I look at it position-by-position, and to me it's obvious. Curry is much better than Lin could ever hope to be, both as a shooter and a ball-handler, Thompson is a better shooter than Harden even if not the "pure" scorer, Barnes' rookie numbers compare nicely to Parsons' and I think they'll be very comparable players but must admit Parsons has set the progression curve pretty high, Lee is miles better than Asik, and GS's bench is better. That's my opinion, and it will never be proven right or wrong.
well at least one of Thompson/Barnes wasn't going to be there if Dwight was. Not that Iggy is a horrible replacement, you just can't talk about both of those young guys. Jack and Landry also left diminishing the bench.
I think there are real arguments for both Houston (Lin, Harden, Parsons, Asik, Howard) and Golden State (Curry, Thompson, Iggy, Lee, Howard). I do believe GS would be slightly better, but not enough in my mind to make any real difference on the court. So Dwight went to the place he felt more comfortable (he is good friends with Harden, has worked with Hakeem a lot, and has a big man rather than guard for a coach) and where he would be taxed less (and thus would make more money).