If Stevens doesn't want the iso-ball of Wade, we sure as heck wouldn't be interesting in Westbrook. Neither makes any sense, but at least with Wade you could get him without giving up any major assets (aside from Amir and Jerebko).
The argument can be made that Russell Westbrook is a superstar. He was an MVP candidate last year. He is in his prime as well.
When you are a GM there is one set of rules for acquiring in prime superstars and a completely different one for non superstars. Westbrook (who I know you think is tremendously overrated) at least seems to have the talent to transcend fit and scheme. Dwayne Wade, at this point in his career, does not. It's a superstar league.
There's absolutely no argument that Westbrook ISN'T a superstar. He's a legit MVP candidate. Of course, that doesn't mean I think we should necessarily take the risk of trading for him without reassurances. I just think it's absolute non-sense that some on here say that a player of Westbrook's caliber isn't a superstar.
An argument can be made that Westbrook is the most overrated player in he NBA and is as much a "superstar" as Rajon Rondo was... in other words - not a superstar.
It would be a very silly argument, but an argument nonetheless...
His level of ballhoggery is unparalleled. I read that only Kobe Bryant ever had a higher usage rate than Westbrook. If you're willing to let a guy completely dominate the ball, stats are inevitable. That's why he's also top 3 in turnovers. His 29% three point shooting is atrocious. When not sharing the ball with the greatest offensive player in the league, Westbrook's FG% dropped to 42%. He jacked up 20+ shots per night while leading his team to a borderline .500 record (they were in the lotto that year).
When you consider a team like Boston that relies on ball movement and open shots (5th in the league last season in PPG despite being 24th in FG% and 28th in 3p%), I'm not sure how adding another bricklayer like WEstbrook is really going to help. The team needs someone who can consistently make shots - that aint Westbrook. They need someone who will share the ball. That aint Westbrook. They need elite defenders - Westbrook was below average. So you'd be benching one of our premiere guard defenders (one of our greatest strengths) to feed minutes into a guy who hurts our defense and hurts our offense. What this team also needs is someone who can make shots down the line as a go-to scorer - that aint Westbrook. He's bottom 3 in the league in FG% during the last 10 seconds of the game and Overtime. He shoots something like 12% during crunch time.
He's a good player. I'd definitely call him an all-star. But if a team thinks they are going to build a team around Westbrook and be successful, they could be setting themselves up for disappointment. There's a reason why Durant left. It must have been ungodly frustrating to play with an inferior ball hog hurting the team and inflating his stats when you know you're a top 3 player in the world carrying that team deep into the playoffs every year - while casuals sat around claiming Westbrook was possibly "better". I would have left too.
Just wish Durant had gone to a team other than Golden State. That was shameful.
Topic: Why does danny seem to have no interest in Wade? (Read 3172 times)