Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hmm, regular season...remember when bold statements were made about the Cavs following their 34 point loss to the Warriors in January? What about the Thunder who were 0-3 in the regular season against the Warriors?
The Clippers played the Warriors twice with Blake Griffin - first game decided by 4 and second by 7. You can't possibly take anything from that. If the Warriors showed us anything, it's that they are not the same team in the playoffs when things get more physical. Here's the proof: 5-0 against Cavs/Thunder in regular season vs 7-7 in the playoffs.
The Warriors did beat the Thunder, but they didn't sweep them, still won. But that's not the point here. It's the Clippers, who've accomplished zilch. I'm not taking them in any series against the Warriors. No, the regular season isn't always an indicator, but sometimes it is. What have the Clippers shown us? Nothing. The Clips don't have the resume' of none of the teams we've mentioned. They have done nothing on the level of SA, OKC or Cleveland. You're pushing the idea that because OKC and the Cavs challenged GS, the Clippers can? That proves nothing either.
A team that has never been out of the second round (LAC) can now beat a team with two trips to the Finals (GS) because OTHER teams (OKC, Cleve) challenged said Finals participant (GS)? Hmmmmm....
I hope you're not making excuses for the Warriors. Green got suspended, and that's on him. Maybe don't get a million technicals next year. Every team gets banged up, and they fight through it. Champions win anyway. Pollard broke his ribs in the first play of the super bowl but still played through it and won. Maybe Kerr should have rested his guys instead of going for a silly record. Maybe Curry shouldn't have played as much the first 2 rounds when he wasn't needed.
Who knows how much the concussion messed with him in games 4-6, when he was terrible? You ignore that, but say not to ignore it with Iggy in game 7...
The fact is, the Warriors looked like an average team since the start of game 3. Not a championship team. They peaked too soon.
Examining the reasons for a teams destruction is not excuse making - it's just analysis. Perhaps you should read the title of this thread where I accuse the Warriors of choking.
The old saying "everyone's injured" is true, but lets not pretend that injuries impact every team to the same degree.
Sure Love's injury could've impacted him, but the Cavs WON without him AND they WON 3 of 4 when he came back. Obviously the concussion and it's possible side effects didn't impact them too much. Perhaps you could say the Cavs win in 6 or by bigger margins, but does it really matter at this point?
Game 5 in Oakland was a 3 pt game in the 3rd when Bogut goes out. I don't think it's inconceivable that the Warriors wrap it up in 5 games had they not had the double whammy of Bogut's injury and Green's suspension. To his credit, Draymond was the Warrior's best player in 3 of the 6 games he played in. Of course, we'll never know, but being down two starters certainly didn't help their cause.
Yes. Cleveland was in control first half, and fell apart in the second half. So the Warriors had one really good half of basketball in 5 games.
Examining the reasons for a teams destruction is not excuse making - it's just analysis. Perhaps you should read the title of this thread where I accuse the Warriors of choking.
The old saying "everyone's injured" is true, but lets not pretend that injuries impact every team to the same degree.
Sure Love's injury could've impacted him, but the Cavs WON without him AND they WON 3 of 4 when he came back. Obviously the concussion and it's possible side effects didn't impact them too much. Perhaps you could say the Cavs win in 6 or by bigger margins, but does it really matter at this point?
Maybe they lost 4 because of him? He truly looked terrible until game 7. Who knows? It's just pretty silly to make excuses for Iguodala but not Love. This whole thing is pretty silly. The Warriors were better in games 1-2, but that seems like forever ago, and they weren't very good since then. Which isn't to say they were necessarily awful. Game 7 was obviously close and they were good enough to take over in the 2nd half of game 4. They were even good enough to keep game 5 close until late in the 3rd.
The Warriors did beat the Thunder, but they didn't sweep them, still won. But that's not the point here. It's the Clippers, who've accomplished zilch. I'm not taking them in any series against the Warriors. No, the regular season isn't always an indicator, but sometimes it is. What have the Clippers shown us? Nothing. The Clips don't have the resume' of none of the teams we've mentioned. They have done nothing on the level of SA, OKC or Cleveland. You're pushing the idea that because OKC and the Cavs challenged GS, the Clippers can? That proves nothing either.
So what happens when a team that has lost 3-4 years suddenly breaks through and wins? Does that mean they sucked all the years they didn't win? The Clippers have had 4 healthy years together - it's not like they've been at it for 20 years. Sure, they maybe under performed at times, but losing to the Spurs, Thunder and 56 win Grizzlies doesn't mean you're currently a garbage team. That's just the western conference over the last 4-5 years. Let's not forget the Clippers beat a pretty loaded Warriors team in '14...the year before they won it all.
Maybe they lost 4 because of him? He truly looked terrible until game 7. Who knows? It's just pretty silly to make excuses for Iguodala but not Love. This whole thing is pretty silly. The Warriors were better in games 1-2, but that seems like forever ago, and they weren't very good since then. Which isn't to say they were necessarily awful. Game 7 was obviously close and they were good enough to take over in the 2nd half of game 4. They were even good enough to keep game 5 close until late in the 3rd.
Here's the thing with concussion protocol...
Quote:
If a player is suspected of having a concussion, league rules call for testing before he can return to the floor. If the player doesn't pass the tests, he must enter the concussion protocol. Love will not be able to return until he is symptom-free and can pass tests that meet baselines he established in preseason testing.
The Warriors will probably remember game 5 for a long time. The combination of Green (their best player 3 of 6 games) getting suspended and Bogut getting injured could've cost them a championship. If they close it out in 5, Iguodala's back is a non-issue in games 6 and 7.
The Warriors will probably remember game 5 for a long time. The combination of Green (their best player 3 of 6 games) getting suspended and Bogut getting injured could've cost them a championship. If they close it out in 5, Iguodala's back is a non-issue in games 6 and 7.
Yeah... Lebron was kinda lucky Draymond put himself in like that position of being a technical away....
So what happens when a team that has lost 3-4 years suddenly breaks through and wins? Does that mean they sucked all the years they didn't win? The Clippers have had 4 healthy years together - it's not like they've been at it for 20 years. Sure, they maybe under performed at times, but losing to the Spurs, Thunder and 56 win Grizzlies doesn't mean you're currently a garbage team. That's just the western conference over the last 4-5 years. Let's not forget the Clippers beat a pretty loaded Warriors team in '14...the year before they won it all.
Yes, I ignore two years of regular season records, but the '14 playoff series is now gospel? Using your logic, the Warriors were the sixth seed in that series, and only lost 4-3. So, obviously they can beat the Clippers now since they challenged the Clips. But what happens to the team that has performed the past two years? I'm supposed to ignore their accomplishments just because they lost last night and take the team that hasn't advanced to the WCF the past two? I'm not going back 20. The past two years the Warriors haven't lost those series, while the Clippers have. It's okay for you to say the '14 series means the Clips would win, but I'm supposed to ignore the past two years for the Warriors. I'm not saying the Clippers are garbage. I'm only refuting the claim they are all of a sudden better than GS because GS lost last night. They've underachieved some yes, but now I'm supposed to take them over a team that hasn't really underachieved at all?
Are you saying the Clips are going to break through? That is different to me than saying they can beat the Warriors.
A 73 win team should NEVER, ever, ever, ever get beat with a 3-1 lead in the Finals. That is the BEST regular season record in NBA history...70 years.
2016 will be the year the Cavs finally won, but it'll probably be equally known for the biggest choke in NBA history.
As I previously stated, regardless of how a team got to the finals, anything can happen. I again reference the 18-0 PAtriots, first team in NFL history to go 18-0 since the season was extended, and they lose to the Giants. As a Pats fan I never saw a choke. I saw another team peak and take us down.
If anyone says LeBron isn't in the top echelon of the greatest NBA players of all time is wrong. That's what beat the first ever 73 game in a season team. And Irving had a great series too. Be a sport and a fan of sport and allow yourself to see that the better team won the series, the team that played better in the finals regardless of how they got there.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
