But maybe most importantly, at only 21 Durant is still probably five years away from even peaking and entering his prime (as crazy as that sounds)
You betray your anti-Portland bias (out of depression, I realize, not due to "not being a true fan") by comments like this. With Bayless, who is also 21, you barely allow that "maybe he still has some upside." With Durant, he's "probably still five years away from even peaking and entering his prime (as crazy as that sounds)"!
Don't you see the rhetorical double-standard you're employing here? It may not be intentional, but it is spin...downplaying the same dynamic when it comes to Portland, hyping it when it comes to the competitor you "fear" most.
And, no, I don't think Durant being far better than Bayless changes anything in this respect. It changes the baseline...how good each is now and how good each will be in their prime. It doesn't change where each is on the development curve.
In fact, if there is any difference, I'd say it weighs
against Durant developing more in the next five years than Bayless. Freaks like Durant don't start amazing and ascend to godhood over the next 5-6 years. They start amazing and then see diminishing returns because there's only so good a human player can be. Jordan fine-tuned his game over the years, but he really wasn't much better at 27 than he was at 22 or 23. Same for LeBron James. Most really great talents had a big jump in their first couple of years, as they acclimated to the NBA, and then saw fairly modest improvements the rest of the way to their prime. The real issue is that these freaks simply have a longer prime...it starts very, very early.
Durant is always going to be much, much better than Bayless. But there's a pretty solid chance that Bayless develops more in the next five years. He has much more room to improve than Durant and nothing suggests that Bayless isn't going to follow the usual development curve...after all, his production improved considerably from Year 1 to Year 2.
I realize that just as a person can often be his/her own harshest critic, passionate fans can often be the team's own harshest critics. But I think you cloud your analysis too much with your "omg It's never going to happen for my team, is it?" pessimism. You should temper your pessimism, just as some need to temper their optimism. Just my opinion.
). It's just not a very sound element in analyzing the current prospects of a team, IMO. I won't keep mentioning it...I probably shouldn't have this time, since you're entitled to feel any way you want and I don't want to seem preachy. I just thought you might want to consider that you might cloud your own analysis (and, by extension, happiness when thinking about the team).
