Several respectable writers and analysts have written/discussed that they think Gordon Hayward is actually the best player on the Celtics. Obviously Kyrie will be the first option on offense, but there's a legitimate question as to whether he is a better overall player than Hayward. I can see arguments for both sides but feel that ultimately Hayward is better right now (the guy really has no holes in his game) but Kyrie on his best day is better than Hayward. Moreover, Kyrie has a higher ceiling. I'm curious what you guys think.
At the very least, Irving and Hayward will be enough of 1a and 1b that KI will have similar gripes that what he's had before, unfounded or not.
Kyrie was on the team and there are an awful lot of highlights of him connected to our championship. Can still enjoy those know what douche he was?
I agree completely - it's possible to acknowledge that he had a tremendous 2016 postseason, as well as other highlights, and that he is still the 2nd best Cav of all time IMHO, and also acknowledge that he had shortcomings on and off the court then, as he does now.