NBA 2016-17

[charlton66]

The same Curry who lost the finals despite that he was winning 3-1? Becoming the first ever team to lose the finals after getting that lead.

AD and KAT should maybe qualify first for playoff before we hypothesize what they can do. And Kawhi, well, Durant was the star of the semis when Thunders defeated Spurs 4-1, despite that Spurs had the home advantage.



Durant isn't a great leader, I grant you that. The comparisons with Tracy McGrady seem to hold not only for their style of play, but also for their lack of leadership compared with the other greats.

I think that part of the reason why Thunders didn't win something was Westbrook. It is impossible to play with that guy and win something. Harden wasn't a superstar back then, he wasn't that great.

Curry is probably a better leader, but not that much. On the first finals, Iguodala got MVP of the playoffs, and in the second finals, Curry totally flopped. Not a sign of great leadership IMO. He was the MVP of the regular season both those years.

This year, Durant has as much to do with Warriors having this record in the playoff. Both have been equally great (and Green has been almost as good as them to be fair).

Interesting discussion you guys have got going. Personally, I think Durant can do more things and in terms of pure athleticism is a better player. Certainly, if you listen to the majority of the basketball talking heads they have KD on top. However, having said all that, these are the same pundits that 18 months ago were declaring Steph the best player in the league. I think if you look at it more carefully you'll find these guys usually have an agenda they are trying to push (Cowherd - pro LeBron, Bayless - anti LeBron as examples) or they are trying to appeal to the extremely short attention span of their viewership. Thus, for the most part I think you can take what they have to say with a grain of salt. For me, personally, I've got to go with Steph (surprise, surprise). On the court he is a stone cold killer, KD is not. People will point out that he "took a step back" or he was way too passive in allowing Durant to integrate himself into the team but the best players will do that if they think it will make the overall team better (are you listening Russ ). Notice how quickly he made it clear to Steve Kerr that things had to change when he thought it had gone too far after the Dubs defeat in Cleveland at the end of last year. Steph basically put his foot down and said "enough" and they've not looked back. In terms of pure statistics it's probably a toss of a coin, when you include intangibles it's gotta be Steph.

 

[freeurmind]

Curry isn't even the real leader of the warriors. It's clearly Draymond Green.

 

[charlton66]

Curry isn't even the real leader of the warriors. It's clearly Draymond Green.

No, Draymond is the floor General and captain, Steph is the leader. The Dubs are Steph's team.

 

[Revan]

Interesting discussion you guys have got going. Personally, I think Durant can do more things and in terms of pure athleticism is a better player. Certainly, if you listen to the majority of the basketball talking heads they have KD on top. However, having said all that, these are the same pundits that 18 months ago were declaring Steph the best player in the league. I think if you look at it more carefully you'll find these guys usually have an agenda they are trying to push (Cowherd - pro LeBron, Bayless - anti LeBron as examples) or they are trying to appeal to the extremely short attention span of their viewership. Thus, for the most part I think you can take what they have to say with a grain of salt. For me, personally, I've got to go with Steph (surprise, surprise). On the court he is a stone cold killer, KD is not. People will point out that he "took a step back" or he was way too passive in allowing Durant to integrate himself into the team but the best players will do that if they think it will make the overall team better (are you listening Russ ). Notice how quickly he made it clear to Steve Kerr that things had to change when he thought it had gone too far after the Dubs defeat in Cleveland at the end of last year. Steph basically put his foot down and said "enough" and they've not looked back. In terms of pure statistics it's probably a toss of a coin, when you include intangibles it's gotta be Steph.

Stats - draw
Attack - draw
Defense - KD
Influence on the team - Steph

Agree about pundits. Cowherd is extremely biased pro-Lebron, Skip is the ultimate Wummer (I don't even think that he is anti LeBron, more like he wants to troll everyone). Chris Broussard is excellent though, I agree with him pretty much all the time.

Curry isn't even the real leader of the warriors. It's clearly Draymond Green.

This is totally true.

 

[charlton66]

Stats - draw
Attack - draw
Defense - KD
Influence on the team - Steph

Agree about pundits. Cowherd is extremely biased pro-Lebron, Skip is the ultimate Wummer (I don't even think that he is anti LeBron, more like he wants to troll everyone). Chris Broussard is excellent though, I agree with him pretty much all the time.

Since you often point out that Curry didn't win the finals MVP when the Dubs won it all, I've heard Broussard say on more than one occasion that it should have been Steph and not Andre Iguodala who won the award.

This is totally true.

Not at all - see above.

 

[el3mel]

I noticed by reading posts and comments that both set of fans truly dislike each other, I'm personally as neutral as it gets Just hope to see some good matches is all

They are like the" Real and Barca kind of rivalry " of NBA if you understand me.

 

[Revan]

Since you often point out that Curry didn't win the finals MVP when the Dubs won it all, I've heard Broussard say on more than one occasion that it should have been Steph and not Andre Iguodala who won the award.

Lets be fair, it should have been LeBron. I mean, it has happened in the past that a player from a losing team wins it. And I doubt that there has ever been a better losing performance than that from LeBron.

But yes, I kind of agree that Curry was the best Warriors players and should have got the MVP. But Iguodala got it, and really, it was close between them.

Not at all - see above.

What is the difference between 'captain and floor general' with the leader?

 

[charlton66]

Lets be fair, it should have been LeBron. I mean, it has happened in the past that a player from a losing team wins it. And I doubt that there has ever been a better losing performance than that from LeBron.

But yes, I kind of agree that Curry was the best Warriors players and should have got the MVP. But Iguodala got it, and really, it was close between them.

No it really shouldn't. The Cavs were undermanned it is true but LeBron shot less than 40% from the field and just over 30% from 3 point range with a usage rate of 41%. That was a major factor in why Iguodala won it in that he limited LeBron's impact (in truth LeBron was just knackered by the end). However, if you look at Curry's stats he shot 44% from the field, 39% from 3 point range and averaged 26 points per game. Andre on the other hand averaged 16 points per game. When four of the six games were decided by less than 10 points IMLTHO Curry should have won it.

What is the difference between 'captain and floor general' with the leader?

The difference is that Draymond is the voice on the court, hence is the captain and floor General. Steph is "the man" off the court, the guy the media come to, the face of the team - their leader. No one would ever say the Warriors were Draymond's team. That is the difference.

Steph leads by example, thank God Draymond doesn't.

 

[Rawls]

No it really shouldn't. The Cavs were undermanned it is true but LeBron shot less than 40% from the field and just over 30% from 3 point range with a usage rate of 41%. That was a major factor in why Iguodala won it in that he limited LeBron's impact. However, if you look at Curry's stats he shot 44% from the field, 39% from 3 point range and averaged 26 points per game. Andre on the other hand averaged 16 points per game. When four of the six games were decided by less than 10 points IMLTHO Curry should have won it.

I think Iguodala deserved to win the 2015 Finals MVP (Under the proviso that the Finals MVP must come from the winning team; otherwise LBJ would have deserved to win it). The Warriors were struggling through the first three games and IIRC, their switch to the Death Lineup in Game 4 swung the series back in their favour. Also, Iggy is usually not much of a threat as a shooter; in the last three games of the series, he was in serious shooting form. Curry had also struggled through the first four games before improving in the last two games of the series, so it very much seemed like Iguodala had been the major influence in steering the Warriors back on course.

 

[Moby]

are you listening Russ

He only listens to Lil Uzi Vert - Now I do what I want! And follows that on the court.

 

[Moby]

No, Draymond is the floor General and captain, Steph is the leader. The Dubs are Steph's team.

@The Red Viper

 

[charlton66]

I think Iguodala deserved to win the 2015 Finals MVP (Under the proviso that the Finals MVP must come from the winning team; otherwise LBJ would have deserved to win it). The Warriors were struggling through the first three games and IIRC, their switch to the Death Lineup in Game 4 swung the series back in their favour. Also, Iggy is usually not much of a threat as a shooter; in the last three games of the series, he was in serious shooting form. Curry had also struggled through the first four games before improving in the last two games of the series, so it very much seemed like Iguodala had been the major influence in steering the Warriors back on course.

The Warriors were down 2-1 in the series. Steph led the team in scoring in games 5, 6 and 7. I'm obviously in the minority as far as my opinion is concerned since Steph didn't get a single vote for finals MVP. It's obviously just me and Chris Broussard that would have given him the award.

 

[Moby]

We're talking about someone who scored over 30ppg on 55% shooting in the NBA finals against LeBron as a 23 year old. Weak' my ass.

You must have missed the ten times I called him an all time great scoring machine. That is all he is.

If you think he has a great presence on the floor, around his teammates, for the fans and the franchise, or that he's an inspirational figure on or off the court or he is someone who can elevate the entire team's performance around him apart from his individual contribution or anything in that order then we've clearly not watched the same player.

I obviously value that a lot more than technical ability, even though KD is an elite player when it comes to that. Right now, it's an absolute no brainer on whose loss will affect the Dubs more if it were to happen. Durant goes - sure, huge loss in points, as Thunder have realised as well, can the others fill that etc. Curry goes - the entire dressing room, the staff, the fans, absolutely distraught. He means far, far more to this team and embodies their philosophy, their strengths and their identity. Durant is a hero baller, he's here to get a ring for himself and doesn't give two shits about the franchise or their value to the league. There's no respect for that, sorry.

 

[Kasper]

You must have missed the ten times I called him an all time great scoring machine. That is all he is.

If you think he has a great presence on the floor, around his teammates, for the fans and the franchise, or that he's an inspirational figure on or off the court or he is someone who can elevate the entire team's performance around him apart from his individual contribution or anything in that order then we've clearly not watched the same player.

I obviously value that a lot more than technical ability, even though KD is an elite player when it comes to that. Right now, it's an absolute no brainer on whose loss will affect the Dubs more if it were to happen. Durant goes - sure, huge loss in points, as Thunder have realised as well, can the others fill that etc. Curry goes - the entire dressing room, the staff, the fans, absolutely distraught. He means far, far more to this team and embodies their philosophy, their strengths and their identity. Durant is a hero baller, he's here to get a ring for himself and doesn't give two shits about the franchise or their value to the league. There's no respect for that, sorry.

You must have missed the moment where you called him weak.
Weak is someone who crumbles under pressure, can't translate his skillset into the game or gets pushed around. I don't give a shit what he means to the Dubs franchise or if he's a inspirational figure on or off the floor. What is that even supposed to mean? He doesn't have any off court issues and has done a lot for the OKC community. That's more inspirational than most players in the league. I also don't give a shit if he's supposed to be respected, when did the discussion turn that way? Obviously Curry means more for the GSW franchise since he's been there his whole NBA career. They were looking for a player that could improve them and Durant, who himself was looking for an opportunity, was a good fit. Profit for both sides, no point in dramatizing the situation by calling Durant a hero baller or babbling about philosophy and identity.
And maybe he elevates the team's performance more than you think since nearly everyone's FG% at OKC dropped after he left and a once decent support cast is suddenly describes as complete garbage bar Westbrook.

 

[ZDwyr]

Interesting discussion you guys have got going. Personally, I think Durant can do more things and in terms of pure athleticism is a better player. Certainly, if you listen to the majority of the basketball talking heads they have KD on top. However, having said all that, these are the same pundits that 18 months ago were declaring Steph the best player in the league. I think if you look at it more carefully you'll find these guys usually have an agenda they are trying to push (Cowherd - pro LeBron, Bayless - anti LeBron as examples) or they are trying to appeal to the extremely short attention span of their viewership. Thus, for the most part I think you can take what they have to say with a grain of salt. For me, personally, I've got to go with Steph (surprise, surprise). On the court he is a stone cold killer, KD is not. People will point out that he "took a step back" or he was way too passive in allowing Durant to integrate himself into the team but the best players will do that if they think it will make the overall team better (are you listening Russ ). Notice how quickly he made it clear to Steve Kerr that things had to change when he thought it had gone too far after the Dubs defeat in Cleveland at the end of last year. Steph basically put his foot down and said "enough" and they've not looked back. In terms of pure statistics it's probably a toss of a coin, when you include intangibles it's gotta be Steph.

I swear 90% of your posts are either about (or include) some kind of shot about Westbrook. I really don't get the obsession so many Warriors fans have with him.

I think that part of the reason why Thunders didn't win something was Westbrook. It is impossible to play with that guy and win something. Harden wasn't a superstar back then, he wasn't that great.

Partly. But behind (IMO): Bennett being cheap and not wanting to go into the luxury tax, injuries, coming up against great teams, Durant shooting below 30% from three in the Warriors series and probably many other things.

This Durant debate is weird too. It seems obvious to me that he lacks some kind of killer instinct. He isn't really a 'winner' IMO. Ability wise he is, but mentally he definitely isn't.

 

[ZDwyr]

You must have missed the moment where you called him weak.
Weak is someone who crumbles under pressure, can't translate his skillset into the game or gets pushed around. I don't give a shit what he means to the Dubs franchise or if he's a inspirational figure on or off the floor. What is that even supposed to mean? He doesn't have any off court issues and has done a lot for the OKC community. That's more inspirational than most players in the league. I also don't give a shit if he's supposed to be respected, when did the discussion turn that way? Obviously Curry means more for the GSW franchise since he's been there his whole NBA career. They were looking for a player that could improve them and Durant, who himself was looking for an opportunity, was a good fit. Profit for both sides, no point in dramatizing the situation by calling Durant a hero baller or babbling about philosophy and identity.
And maybe he elevates the team's performance more than you think since nearly everyone's FG% at OKC dropped after he left and a once decent support cast is suddenly describes as complete garbage bar Westbrook.

Well, Adams and Kanter dropped by around 3%. That is the only real change considering most of the roster from then are now gone?

 

[Skills]

I swear 90% of your posts are either about (or include) some kind of shot about Westbrook. I really don't get the obsession so many Warriors fans have with him.



Partly. But behind (IMO): Bennett being cheap and not wanting to go into the luxury tax, injuries, coming up against great teams, Durant shooting below 30% from three in the Warriors series and probably many other things.

This Durant debate is weird too. It seems obvious to me that he lacks some kind of killer instinct. He isn't really a 'winner' IMO. Ability wise he is, but mentally he definitely isn't.

Is that James Harden trade now officially the worst of all time?

 

[ZDwyr]

Is that James Harden trade now officially the worst of all time?

It would be up there . My NBA history isn't good enough to fully judge. Considering the only decent thing OKC got in return was Adams...probably yes. Jeremy Lamb was such a bust

 

[Kasper]

Well, Adams and Kanter dropped by around 3%. That is the only real change considering most of the roster from then are now gone?

Westbrook and Roberson as well.

 

[ZDwyr]

Westbrook and Roberson as well.

Yep, missed them two. Still only a small decrease. His presence did help...as he obviously created space for players like Adams and Roberson which they now don't have. Not sure that is a huge effort on his part at making his teammates better though.

 

[charlton66]

I swear 90% of your posts are either about (or include) some kind of shot about Westbrook. I really don't get the obsession so many Warriors fans have with him.

Are you really surprised? You've taken your fair share of shots at Durant and the Dubs but I would expect nothing less under the circumstances of Durant's departure. I actually thought your latest shot at Mike Brown was very clever to be honest. If the Thunder can get some players in to support Westbrook I think there is a huge potential for a tremendous OKC-Warriors rivalry and at the end of the day isn't that what sport is really all about. In the football world I "hate" Liverpool, but it's "hate" in the sporting sense and not in any real sense. If they went away it would massively diminish my enjoyment of the game. "Getting one over" on Liverpool has given me almost as much joy as United winning. As to Westbrook, he has made it clear all season that he has a problem with Durant. Since I'm a Warriors fan, I'm obviously going to support my guy in the same way I'd expect you to support yours as a Thunder fan. I've actually said some really nice things about Russ this season to be honest if you go back through my posts (I was obviously drunk at the time but that's beside the point). Anyway, IMLTHO (as long as it doesn't cross the line) long may the banter continue.

 

[ZDwyr]

Are you really surprised? You've taken your fair share of shots at Durant and the Dubs but I would expect nothing less under the circumstances of Durant's departure. I actually thought your latest shot at Mike Brown was very clever to be honest. If the Thunder can get some players in to support Westbrook I think there is a huge potential for a tremendous OKC-Warriors rivalry and at the end of the day isn't that what sport is really all about. In the football world I "hate" Liverpool, but it's "hate" in the sporting sense and not in any real sense. If they went away it would massively diminish my enjoyment of the game. "Getting one over" on Liverpool has given me almost as much joy as United winning. As to Westbrook, he has made it clear all season that he has a problem with Durant. Since I'm a Warriors fan, I'm obviously going to support my guy in the same way I'd expect you to support yours as a Thunder fan. I've actually said some really nice things about Russ this season to be honest if you go back through my posts (I was obviously drunk at the time but that's beside the point). Anyway, IMLTHO (as long as it doesn't cross the line) long may the banter continue.

TBH I think the Thunder/GSW rivalry was going to be huge for the next 5 years in the West, until Durant wrecked it. Now it is a non-contest. I can see why Thunder fans have issues with the Warriors, but not really the other way around. You guys have Durant. You'll win titles. You're the best team. Thunder won't be on the Warriors radar for a long time. I just don't get why Westbrook is singled out considering he is meaningless to the Warriors in the grand scheme. I guess I can understand the point of wanting to support your guy in the feud with Westbrook, but even that is gone now. They're speaking again and have moved on.

EDIT: My point was on the little digs out of nowhere too. I get if there is banter then it is fair game, but talking about a completely different issue and then just throwing in a Westbrook jab seems strange. Of course if I have done that with KD it is perfectly fine because I am still very, very salty

 

[charlton66]

My point was on the little digs out of nowhere too. I get if there is banter then it is fair game, but talking about a completely different issue and then just throwing in a Westbrook jab seems strange. Of course if I have done that with KD it is perfectly fine because I am still very, very salty

That's the best kind. You're reading something and caught up in the subject and then "bam" out of left field that little dig.

 

[el3mel]

Cavs played in this series in Boston better than in Cleveland. Complete dominance and Celtics aren't a threat in the first half. Celtics did well to push the series to game 5 but that's the maximum they can do tbf.

LeBron can very well break Jordan's record in number of points in playoffs tonight as well.

The awaited most predicted final ever is coming.

 

[VanHaal'sRedArmy]

GS in 7.

 

[Revan]

Boston were awful really. Losing twice with that big of a difference is kind of unacceptable for a seed 1 team.

LeBron passed yesterday Jordan as the all time leading scorer in playoffs. Of course, he needed 33 more games than Jordan to reach it, but nevertheless it is absolutely impressive the level he is playing. Arguably the best basketball of his career, and despite that still I think that Warriors will win relatively easy, LeBron can take the game every moment, and betting against him isn't the smart thing to do.

 

[Moby]

Of course, he needed 33 more games than Jordan to reach it

Took less number of shots.

 

[Revan]

Took less number of shots.

How can that be?

3 point accuracy: LeBron 0.329 vs Jordan 0.332
Field goal accuracy: LeBron 0.483 vs Jordan 0.487
Free throws accuracy: LeBron 0.744 vs Jordan 0.824

In every category, Jordan has a higher accuracy, so how does LeBron took less shots?

 

[Moby]

How can that be?

3 point accuracy: LeBron 0.329 vs Jordan 0.332
Field goal accuracy: LeBron 0.483 vs Jordan 0.487
Free throws accuracy: LeBron 0.744 vs Jordan 0.824

In every category, Jordan has a higher accuracy, so how does LeBron took less shots?

Dunno read it somewhere. You calculation is probably wrong.

 

[Skills]

How can that be?

3 point accuracy: LeBron 0.329 vs Jordan 0.332
Field goal accuracy: LeBron 0.483 vs Jordan 0.487
Free throws accuracy: LeBron 0.744 vs Jordan 0.824

In every category, Jordan has a higher accuracy, so how does LeBron took less shots?

LeBron shoots a lot more 3s. Think he's scored the most 3 pointers in play off history

 

[Moby]

@Revan

Total FGAs in playoffs:

MJ - 4497
LBJ - 4379

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jamesle01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html

Never question me again.

 

[Moby]

@Revan

FG% and 3P% tell you about the percentage of shots someone made out of the ones they took, not who took more shots.

Just letting you know how completely wrong you were.

 

[Revan]

So, LeBron has a higher true shooting percentage?

I guess that might be. @Moby @Skills

 

[Kasper]

So, LeBron has a higher true shooting percentage?

I guess that might be. @Moby @Skills

I think slightly, yes. But it's really close thanks to Jordan being better at FTs.

 

[Moby]

So LeBron is a better scorer than Jordan in playoffs?

Burn your crosses.

 

[charlton66]

This is pretty impressive. Talk about blind man with a pin.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2017/05/stephen-a-smith-nba-finals-predictions-history-wrong-first-take-espn

 

[De Selby]

This is pretty impressive. Talk about blind man with a pin.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2017/05/stephen-a-smith-nba-finals-predictions-history-wrong-first-take-espn

He needs to stick to shilling for a woman beater.

http://deadspin.com/what-the-feck-is-wrong-with-stephen-a-smith-1700198846

 

[MullerUtd]

So as expected, its the Cavaliers facing the Warriors in the final again. Does the Cavaliers actually have a chance against the Warriors? I'm a Cavaliers fan so I'd like to think that we can beat them again, but after the pain and hurt we put the Warriors through, I think we might get humiliated. Warriors is the best revenge team and they would want to beat us after our comeback win last season.

 

[giorno]

If LeBron keeps playing like this, you'll win again

 

[gica_7]

So as expected, its the Cavaliers facing the Warriors in the final again. Does the Cavaliers actually have a chance against the Warriors? I'm a Cavaliers fan so I'd like to think that we can beat them again, but after the pain and hurt we put the Warriors through, I think we might get humiliated. Warriors is the best revenge team and they would want to beat us after our comeback win last season.

I don't have a dog in this fight but last year you were a little lucky. Obviously, Warriors were lucky the year before also but, Steph was banged up, Bogut got injured, Draymond lost it. So far, I have not been impressed with Cavs' defence. Cavs gave away way too much open threes and back door cuts to Celtics but Celtics just could not manage to sink those opportunities. Warriors are just too good this year.