I think the match was not one-sided to a large extent because the bowlers of both teams took advantage of the pitch and the batsmen did not score runs. Australia lost all their wickets in the first innings for just 286 runs but it should be noted that they are not a team that gets out for such a low score in Tests. Batting, West Indies lost all their wickets in the first innings for just 253 runs. The performance of the bowlers of both teams throughout the match was impressive and in that case the Australian bowlers did relatively well as a result of which West Indies could only score 143 runs in the second innings. The 133-run win was the best for Australia because they probably did not expect to win by such a huge margin. While praising the bowlers for the victory the pitch should be praised.
I have no idea what you are going on about here. Almost everyone expected the Aussies to easily win against the Windies and that is exactly what happened. Winning by such a big margin literally implies that it was one sided for a big portion of the match.
Them getting out for 286 isn't an issue when their opponent is West Indies even if it's on their turf. Your points would make more sense if their opponent was far stronger.
Australia won against West Indies for the second time, when Australia were batting in the second innings, I understood there and West Indies could not chase it as often West Indies middle order often got confused when they lost early wickets.
West Indies top order is good but on top the Australia's bowlers are massive and at the end of the day, the results are in front of us. Alex Carey was the player of the game, he played average, nothing surprising but still looking at the pitch condition and on the other team's effort, so he deserved it.