2016 NBA Off-Season Thread part 2

[gordontrue]

Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but virtually everyone else, including the all-time greats themselves use that standard. I'd suggest you take it up with them.

You get me the meeting and I'll convince them.

 

[trojanfan12]

But my whole point is that "how they fared in the Finals" isn't worthy of our consideration. We should be considering how they fared... period. Narrowing it down to how they fared "in the Finals" is an unnecessary and useless filter that obfuscates reality and distorts our conclusion.

It can lead to things like you concluding that Jordan wouldn't be the GOAT if he had somehow dragged a 47-win Bulls team to a series victory over the Bad Boy Pistons in 1989.

I have no interest in making excuses for LeBron's failed seasons or trying to say that any of them don't count. I just have an issue with holding Finals losses as bigger negative than earlier playoff exits.. when the opposite is in fact true.

For example, LeBron losing to the Magic in the ECF in 2009 - with a 61 win Cavs team was a FAR bigger failure than losing to the Warriors last year or losing to the Spurs in 07.

As I've said before, when you talk about the all-time greats, the difference between them is razor thin. It's what makes them all time greats in the first place. If we are going to rank them, there has to be a tiebreaker of some sort because of close they all are. The tiebreaker that is used is hpw they fared in the finals. It's why players like Barkley and Malone who never won a finals and Jerry West who was something like 1-9 the finals aren't in the GOAT conversation despite being all-time greats themselves.

 

[WiggyRuss]

But my whole point is that "how they fared in the Finals" isn't worthy of our consideration. We should be considering how they fared... period. Narrowing it down to how they fared "in the Finals" is an unnecessary and useless filter that obfuscates reality and distorts our conclusion.

It can lead to things like you concluding that Jordan wouldn't be the GOAT if he had somehow dragged a 47-win Bulls team to a series victory over the Bad Boy Pistons in 1989.

I have no interest in making excuses for LeBron's failed seasons or trying to say that any of them don't count. I just have an issue with holding Finals losses as bigger negative than earlier playoff exits.. when the opposite is in fact true.

For example, LeBron losing to the Magic in the ECF in 2009 - with a 61 win Cavs team was a FAR bigger failure than losing to the Warriors last year or losing to the Spurs in 07.

exactly- bottom line is- Having a Finals record of 6-2 is better than having a Finals record of 6-0 because that means you were more successful in your career.

 

[trojanfan12]

You get me the meeting and I'll convince them.

Don't waste your time. I've already tried.

 

[trojanfan12]

exactly- bottom line is- Having a Finals record of 6-2 is better than having a Finals record of 6-0 because that means you were more successful in your career.

So then, Kareem at 6-4 in the finals is the GOAT?

I can live with that.

 

[CitySushi]

Last nights Warrior game was a perfect example of why I've been saying all off-season that Klay doesn't need to change his game at all with the addition of Durant. He's still the same player and he's still gets the same opportunities, just at a lesser volume. He doesn't have to do anything different because of the threat of everyone on the court. He dropped 30 in 3 quarters on 14 shots. Why? Because he was pretty much open every damn time. Think about that. The arguably second best shooter in the NBA was wide open time after time because of the threats out on the court.

 

[WiggyRuss]

So then, Kareem at 6-4 in the finals is the GOAT?

I can live with that.

its better than 6-0 in the Finals----- means you got to the biggest stage 4 more times

I am sure if you asked Jordan if he would have rather beat the Pistons or lost to the Pistons- and then lost in the Finals- he would tell you i would have rather beat the Pistons and made the Finals then lose in the ECF.

its 100% pure common sense.

 

[WiggyRuss]

Last nights Warrior game was a perfect example of why I've been saying all off-season that Klay doesn't need to change his game at all with the addition of Durant. He's still the same player and he's still gets the same opportunities, just at a lesser volume. He doesn't have to do anything different because of the threat of everyone on the court. He dropped 30 in 3 quarters on 14 shots. Why? Because he was pretty much open every damn time. Think about that. The arguably second best shooter in the NBA was wide open time after time because of the threats out on the court.

really????? REALLY? PRESEASON?? Game 1 of the preseason? LOL

dude-

call me back in January and it might actually mean something. Better yet- call me back in June- until June Durant cant prove shit to anyone.

 

[CitySushi]

really????? REALLY? PRESEASON?? Game 1 of the preseason? LOL

dude-

call me back in January and it might actually mean something. Better yet- call me back in June- until June Durant cant prove shit to anyone.

Um. Wat?

My post was about Klay.

 

[Bulletz]

exactly- bottom line is- Having a Finals record of 6-2 is better than having a Finals record of 6-0 because that means you were more successful in your career.

I see what you're saying, but would a 6-12 record in the finals be as good or better than 6-0? Not saying this applies to Lebron obviously, but at some point, having a good enough team to get to the finals and not getting it done has to have some kind of negative connotation.

 

[WiggyRuss]

Um. Wat?

My post was about Klay.

whoever-- you learn ZERO about shot selection and sharing the ball in preseason game 1...why not cite summer league while you are at it?

 

[trojanfan12]

I see what you're saying, but would a 6-12 record in the finals be as good or better than 6-0? Not saying this applies to Lebron obviously, but at some point, having a good enough team to get to the finals and not getting it done has to have some kind of negative connotation.

^^^This^^^

 

[CitySushi]

whoever-- you learn ZERO about shot selection and sharing the ball in preseason game 1...why not cite summer league while you are at it?

Boy, you got your panties in a bunch today.

I just pointed out that this is indicative of what the team could be like at it's best. And clearly Klay is built for that because his game again doesn't need to change. He's not reliant upon having the ball in his hands.

I didn't say "OMG WARRIORS SO GOOD CAVS SUCK WE'RE GONNA WIN THE CHAMPIONSHIP".

All I said was that last nights game is why Klay won't need to change his role. I didn't say he's going to drop 30 every game. I didn't say he's going to be an MVP candidate. Hell I didn't say anything about Kyrie, so I'm not sure why you're so angry about me pointing out a SIMPLE NUANCE of what I witnessed last night.

 

[trojanfan12]

whoever-- you learn ZERO about shot selection and sharing the ball in preseason game 1...why not cite summer league while you are at it?

Disagree to a point. I think it depends on the team. For example, with a team like the Lakers who are installing a new offensive system based on ball movement, you could see the improved ball movement compared to last year.

With a team like GSW, where one of the questions was "how are they going to keep everyone happy?" The ball movement in the first game can be a good sign.

Having said that though, just because the ball movement was good in game 1, doesn't mean it will be sustained. Especially when a team gets into a close game where guys may decide it's on them as an individual to "make plays."

 

[WiggyRuss]

Boy, you got your panties in a bunch today.

I just pointed out that this is indicative of what the team could be like at it's best. And clearly Klay is built for that because his game again doesn't need to change. He's not reliant upon having the ball in his hands.

I didn't say "OMG WARRIORS SO GOOD CAVS SUCK WE'RE GONNA WIN THE CHAMPIONSHIP".

All I said was that last nights game is why Klay won't need to change his role. I didn't say he's going to drop 30 every game. I didn't say he's going to be an MVP candidate. Hell I didn't say anything about Kyrie, so I'm not sure why you're so angry about me pointing out a SIMPLE NUANCE of what I witnessed last night.

i think you learn nothing from presason game 1- or really any presasons game. Shit- im surprised half the guys are even playing. Shit- i hardly think you learn anything in November and December....

there are no tests in the preseason- no difficult situations or adversity where you get an actual credible idea of how a team will perform when it matters under pressure. In my opinion- you wont know dick until the ball rolls out in the 2nd round of the playoffs when there is actually pressure on the players. GMAFB.

 

[CitySushi]

Disagree to a point. I think it depends on the team. For example, with a team like the Lakers who are installing a new offensive system based on ball movement, you could see the improved ball movement compared to last year.

With a team like GSW, where one of the questions was "how are they going to keep everyone happy?" The ball movement in the first game can be a good sign.

Having said that though, just because the ball movement was good in game 1, doesn't mean it will be sustained. Especially when a team gets into a close game where guys may decide it's on them as an individual to "make plays."

Exactly. I wasn't saying "hey everyone, offense is solved, everyone go home".

All I was saying is that Klay doesn't need to change his role for this offense. And its because at the Warriors peak, the ball movement should be optimal.

It's still going to take the team time to figure things out. It won't be pretty at times. I'm not hanging my hat on one preseason game.

 

[WiggyRuss]

Disagree to a point. I think it depends on the team. For example, with a team like the Lakers who are installing a new offensive system based on ball movement, you could see the improved ball movement compared to last year.

With a team like GSW, where one of the questions was "how are they going to keep everyone happy?" The ball movement in the first game can be a good sign.

Having said that though, just because the ball movement was good in game 1, doesn't mean it will be sustained. Especially when a team gets into a close game where guys may decide it's on them as an individual to "make plays."

everything is all hunky-dorey right now- with everyone signing koombiyaaaaa and having a circle jerk about how well it will all work out.

you learn how that will work out when things arent going right- when the pressure is on - when their is adversity. You dont learn anything beating up on half a team in the preseason when everyone is saying and doing the right thing. You learn about how it will work out in Game 2 of the playoffs after you just somehow got upset in Game 1 and the pressure is on---- or in Game 3 after splitting the first two and Draymond is a little limited with an ankle injury and you need to win a game. YOu MIGHT learn a little on Christmas day when you face the Cavs on the road and are down by 6 at half time etc.

to act like you learn anything in preseason game #1 is to me the most ridiculous thing i have ever freaking heard.


like the Cavs---- we learned something about the Cavs in Game 5 after Toronto tied up that series at 2-2. when the pressure is on. The Warriors wont feel pressure for MONTHS on end- besides maybe a marquee matchup or two along the way that in the grand scheme of things reall doesnt mean much (as we saw how the Warriors beat the Cavs ass in December and lost in the Finals).

 

[trojanfan12]

Exactly. I wasn't saying "hey everyone, offense is solved, everyone go home".

All I was saying is that Klay doesn't need to change his role for this offense. And its because at the Warriors peak, the ball movement should be optimal.

It's still going to take the team time to figure things out. It won't be pretty at times. I'm not hanging my hat on one preseason game.

Agree. There will likely be times when the Warriors have the ball moving and look like the juggernaut that most think they will be and there will be times when they look like they've never played a minute together. How successful their season is will be determined by how quickly they get that figured out.

Great ball movement, even in the first pre-season game shows that they are at least capable of sharing the ball.

 

[shopson67]

After getting a top 5 lottery pick one year, I think a team that shows up in the lottery the following year should be excluded from getting into the top 5. Not picking on the Cavs, but using them as an example - I would exclude them from getting into the top 5 after having the number 1 pick the previous year.

I agree, there should be more regulation to block these shenanigans (now that the Lakers are presumed done with them, lol).

 

[gordontrue]

Wiggy you're boxing yourself into a corner for the Cavs first preseason game tonight. Will you really be able to refrain from making positive observations?