>Your logic is flawed and my reaction is perfectly reasonable.
KD is not expendable with his star status and was on a team
>with another superstar already.

Cool. He had an opportunity to go to an inarguably better situation.

PLEASE, show me "facts" to prove OKC is a better choice for anyone, let alone KD, than GS. Unless you're a backcourt starter there's no better situation for pretty much anyone than GS right now.

>KD was a member of the
>>championship contender up 3-1 in the conference finals. His
>team choked away a 3-1 lead and lost to the NBA record Golden
>State Warriors. He joins them months later in free agency.
><--- All facts.

LOL you keep saying "all facts" as though any of this is a point of contention.

>NO, IT IS NOT THE SAME THING.

uh.... what is not the same thing as what?

>Everyone has my reaction to
>this.

"everyone" can be wrong, and they often are. When a significant element of your defense relies on the old 'everyone else is doing it', that's a massive sign that your position is weak.

This is literally unprecedented in NBA history for KD's
>inability to beat this Warriors team. He couldn't beat the
>Warriors so he joined them.

So your argument is that he joined the team *because* he lost to them *one* time?

So, if he lost to this exact same Warriors team and there were better teams with greater stability and a better roster, he still would have gone to the Warriors solely because he couldn't beat them?

This is why your whole "anyone with a brain" comment is dumb as dish plates: you're not looking at the merits of the Warriors as a destination, only the fact that the Warriors beat him, which in and of itself should spell out why they're such an attractive destination to.... anyone with a brain.

>This hurts KD's standing long-term as it looks like he copped
>out and joined the team that beat him on his home court.

To the "dumb, simple, loud, and wrong as fuck" segment of sports fans and pundits, sure.

This shit was dumb when the Heatles formed up. The memes and whatnot were funny and all but the commentary against it was fucking stupid. The notion of faulting someone for improving their surroundings is about as dumb as anything I can think of. Just plain stupid, stupid, stupid. It's small minded, myopic, surface level, non-thinking thinking.

>did not leave for more money he left to win a ring against the
>team that beat him so your example fails. Your career example
>fails completely as it does not take into account.

lol I suppose if you reduce "career standing" to nothing but money. Most people with any sense at all would look at money but also things like culture, stability, management style, positioning for future success, the prospects for personal and organizational success, etc.

Then, people with sense would look at the new situation relative to the old situation.

You're looking at this from an extremely simplistic and emotional standpoint.

So what if a bunch of dumbass base level idiots are going to bitch and moan because he joined the team that beat him? Why the fuck should any man care what the lowest common denominator thinks of them, one way or the other?

There would be no bigger L than shining on a great opportunity because "what will all these other people think? what will the writers write and the posters post?"