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.
I don't think it makes them play one way exclusively. You'd rather have Bogut available than not available, but he is by far the most expendable player in their starting lineup (the second most expendable is obviously Harrison Barnes). Besides, the one way that you think his absence would make the Warriors play is the one way the Cavs absolutely do not want the Warriors to play.
The Warriors can still put a big lineup on the floor. There's just a tradeoff in playing Ezeli over Bogut. Ezeli gives them better athleticism and lateral movement and similar rim protection, which means he's more capable of playing valuable minutes in small lineups. But he also has worse hands and doesn't have the same grasp of their scheme on both ends of the floor that Bogut does. Bogut gives you excellent rim protection and passing, but can get exposed on switches much more easily than Ezeli. So it's not so much that one is "better" as it is they are different. For all of Ezeli's faults, his defense won them a very tight Game 2 against Portland after Bogut got exposed time and time again when forced to switch out on Lillard or McCullom.
Ezeli v. Bogut trade off is huge if you are a Cav fan. Bogut is heady guy, positions himself well on the defensive end and creates better offense for others. If they want to go big now- Great- please do so- this is the Cavs fan talking.
I think it's huge advantage now preparing for one style of play. Again, they can roll out Ezeli and technically go big, but it's not effective IMO like it once was. Bogut has had a nice very overlooked series
Ezeli v. Bogut trade off is huge if you are a Cav fan. Bogut is heady guy, positions himself well on the defensive end and creates better offense for others. If they want to go big now- Great- please do so- this is the Cavs fan talking.
I think it's huge advantage now preparing for one style of play. Again, they can roll out Ezeli and technically go big, but it's not effective IMO like it once was. Bogut has had a nice very overlooked series
Only Bogut hasn't done too much this series. He had 0 points, 1 rebound and 1 blocked shot in Game 4 (which the Warriors won on the road decisively). He's largely been a non-factor against the Cavs, which is why he got benched in last year's Finals. Like I said, you'd rather have him than not have him, but I don't see his absence significantly changing the way the Warriors play as Draymond Green's absence did.
The role of the Warriors' bigs is essentially to keep opposing teams honest for 2.5 to 3 quarters of the game. They are similar to Longley and Wennington in that regard. It's more about what they don't do as opposed to what they actually do (Don't turn the ball over, don't give up easy baskets in the paint, etc). We're probably not going to see any of those guys on the floor once we go beyond the 8th minute of the 4th quarter.
The one game where I felt Bogut's absence was truly felt was in their one loss to San Antonio. But the Warriors didn't even have Ezeli for that game, which led to them being dominated on the glass. All that's really required of Ezeli and Varejao is about 12-15 minutes of hustle (collectively). They just need to focus on not making mistakes rather than doing something great.
Last edited by BajanYankee; 06-15-2016 at 11:25 AM..
Because there's never been an instance of the league or referees affecting the length or outcome of a series.
So you agree that the GS players are in on it and shot poorly on purpose?
Out of curiosity let's hear about where the league affected the length of a series and how it proves the feasibility of a conspiracy to suspend draymond green? Give us the example.
Bogut had 4 or 5 blocks in the first few minutes of one of the earlier games. This is not insignificant. If Ezeli were better, Bogut wouldn't have been starting.
Bogut had 4 or 5 blocks in the first few minutes of one of the earlier games. This is not insignificant. If Ezeli were better, Bogut wouldn't have been starting.
And he hasn't done much else since that game. A game the Warriors were winning by 30+ points, which wasn't all attributable to Andrew Bogut.
You could make the same argument against Bogut: if he were better than Ezeli, then there's no way Kerr would pull him in tight situations. How quickly we all forget...
Quote:
"He changed the whole game with his pick-and-roll defense, his presence around the rim and the energy he gave us,” Warriors head coach Steve Kerr said. “… It was a phenomenal effort by Fezzy to change the game.”
After sitting out the first 80 minutes of the best-of-seven series, Ezeli emerged from the bench with the Warriors trailing by 10 points and 4:09 on the third-quarter clock.
He put together a 12-minute, 52-second run that won’t be forgotten if the Warriors advance in the playoffs and probably even if they go all the way to defending their title. The Warriors outscored Portland by 13 points in Ezeli’s 12:52.
Why would Kerr pull Bogut from the game? Because he's slow, that's why. Bogut does some things better than Ezeli and also does some things worse than Ezeli. I think what's held Ezeli back more than anything was an injury that sidelined him for nearly half the season.
I don't see Bogut's loss as a gamechanger. I see both Bogut and Ezeli as being a bit inconsistent with each bringing different pluses and minuses to the table. The downside in not having Bogut is that if Ezeli's playing like trash, you have to turn to Anderson Varejao. The downside in not having Ezeli is that if Bogut is playing like trash (which he did against OKC), then you have to turn to Anderson Varejao. This is why the Warriors should make acquiring Joakim Noah their top priority during the off-season. He brings most of the positives of Bogut-Ezeli with few of the negatives.
And he hasn't done much else since that game. A game the Warriors were winning by 30+ points, which wasn't all attributable to Andrew Bogut.
You could make the same argument against Bogut: if he were better than Ezeli, then there's no way Kerr would pull him in tight situations. How quickly we all forget...
Why would Kerr pull Bogut from the game? Because he's slow, that's why. Bogut does some things better than Ezeli and also does some things worse than Ezeli. I think what's held Ezeli back more than anything was an injury that sidelined him for nearly half the season.
Bogut has done things now for two years that aren't showing up in the stat columns. He's exceptional screener and passer. The screens have KILLED the Cavs and if you look most of them are borderline illegal and half are illegal.
Bogut is typically the last and sometimes better line of defense rim protector than any other player on their roster. If you play the Cavs you need to be sharp in this area. Cavs are losing the battle at the rim this series- this was the most shocking point to me given the fact we managed against better IMO (Drummond and Biyombo)
You can't discredit his influence by merely stating he's not going 30-35 mins.- If its 10-15 mins. a game so be it. We all have witnessed how easily a game can get away in the series in literally a 3-4 min. chunk of time.
So you agree that the GS players are in on it and shot poorly on purpose?
Out of curiosity let's hear about where the league affected the length of a series and how it proves the feasibility of a conspiracy to suspend draymond green? Give us the example.
The conspiracy is with Cleveland. Lebron's decision-making is all over the place in this series. If its positive and he makes the right move standing underneath the basket the Cavs have done well.
If you are talking conspiracy Lebron has to be in on it. That would be my half hearted grab at a straw.
You can't discredit his influence by merely stating he's not going 30-35 mins.- If its 10-15 mins. a game so be it. We all have witnessed how easily a game can get away in the series in literally a 3-4 min. chunk of time.
I didn't discredit his contributions. I just said that he doesn't provide much value above and beyond what Ezeli provides. The strengths he brings to the table (passing, screen setting, rim protection) can often be outweighed by the weaknesses he brings to the table (slow lateral movement, tendency to get into foul trouble quickly, etc.). His utility is very context dependent. He can be a net positive in certain situations and a negative in others. He was clearly a negative in Portland when he was too slow to recover in pick and rolls between Lillard and Aminu.
Nowhere did I say he doesn't have an influence on the game because "he's not going 30-35 mins." I said that both Bogut and Ezeli have their advantages and disadvantages and that one is not clearly better than the other. If Kerr had stayed with Bogut in the Portland series, it's possible the Warriors wouldn't even be playing in the Finals right now because his defense literally put the clamps on the Blazers' offense.
Bogut has done things now for two years that aren't showing up in the stat columns. He's exceptional screener and passer. The screens have KILLED the Cavs and if you look most of them are borderline illegal and half are illegal.
The Warriors set the same screens as everyone else. Bballbreakdown did a 15 minute video showing screens from every team around the NBA. This is as bogus a claim as "the NBA is rigged!" And this is coming from Ronnie Nunn (a former NBA referee), not some fanboy sitting at a keyboard.
Bogut is typically the last and sometimes better line of defense rim protector than any other player on their roster. If you play the Cavs you need to be sharp in this area. Cavs are losing the battle at the rim this series- this was the most shocking point to me given the fact we managed against better IMO (Drummond and Biyombo)
I wouldn't say Bogut is a better rim protector than Ezeli.
Look at the list below and tell me who the Top 10 rim protectors in the NBA were this season. Two of them play on the same team. And guess what team that is?
Ezeli is probably a better rim protector than Bogut. He's definitely better by a long shot when it comes to perimeter defense since he's much faster than Bogut. The biggest knock on Ezeli, I think, is that he has terrible hands. Whereas most 7 footers can be reliably counted upon to throw down a power dunk with a clear path to the basket, Ezeli may get forced into a jump ball situation by Rajon Rondo. He simply fumbles and bumbles the ball too much.
Otherwise, they are fairly interchangeable players. Both are poor FT shooters. Bogut can't seem to draw fewer than 3 fouls in a half.
To be sure, Ezeli has his faults. But the one good thing about him is that he can provide more on the ball pressure than most big men because he's quick, which means that the defensive unit as a whole can be more aggressive. Bogut has to sag off a guy like Richard Jefferson or J.R. Smith because he doesn't have the lateral movement to keep those guys in front of him for any longer than 0.1 seconds. Ezeli, on the other hand, can step out on those guys and play them a bit longer. He's similar to Serge Ibaka in this regard.
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.
