(3) Golden State Warriors vs (4) Dallas Mavericks WCF

[Stakesarehigh]

Yeah, I don't see him so much as a ''me player'' as I do maybe a tone deaf player or a player who can't see his own weaknesses.

Guys like MJ, Kobe, Lebron...they all understood that as they got older, they were going to have to play smarter because the time would come when they could no longer just overwhelm opponents with their talent. So they all started adding some ''old man'' to their game before they actually needed to use it.

Other guys like Shaq and Westbrook, acted like they never were going lose theirs and had/are having, sharp declines.

Other than blaming him for not ever adding to his game, I don't really blame Westbrook for what happened with the Lakers. Russ is who he is...we all knew that and even the most optimistic posts has a heavy dose of doubt in them about this working. If we all knew that, you can bet that Lebron, AD, the Lakers FO and maybe Russ himself knew it too. They were just able to convince themselves otherwise.

For Russ part, he showed up, played his ass off every single game and did try to adjust. He just couldn't do it in a way that actually worked.

I don't think there is a roster construct that could work for RW at this point in his career. He didn't make the strides needed to hit the 3 ball. Which is kind of wild considering how good a free throw shooter he is.

But yea he hasn't figured his limitations. He looked for a hot second he realized giving up on 3s was the answer back in Houston but he regressed back to them.

 

[msgkings322]

You know who would be a good center for them? Kevon Looney. He's a free agent at the end of the year. He might be playing himself out of a contract with the Warriors. Love to see it. He would deserve a cash out.

The hope would be Wiseman steps into that role

 

[msgkings322]

Sucks for us, but you definitely have to be happy for the guy. I wonder about GP2, too. I figure that some team out there would be willing to offer him more than the minimum. Otto Porter will probably be gone, too.

Yep. They are going to be paying tons of tax especially if they keep Poole which they should. Porter, Looney, and GP2 will all be gone. Just as well as Wiseman, Kuminga, and Moody will all need more minutes

 

[trojanfan12]

I don't think there is a roster construct that could work for RW at this point in his career. He didn't make the strides needed to hit the 3 ball. Which is kind of wild considering how good a free throw shooter he is.

But yea he hasn't figured his limitations. He looked for a hot second he realized giving up on 3s was the answer back in Houston but he regressed back to them.

Yeah, about the only way that I can see Russ having a role that can have a chance at working would be if he could be convinced to come off of the bench and be the captain of the 2nd unit. Then they could let Russ do his thing. On team with starters who play at a more deliberate pace, it could add another dimension similar to how the Mavs pace speeds up when Luka is out.

If he is still with the Lakers at the start of training camp, that is the approach I'd like to see them take. I wouldn't want him on the court with Lebron much at all. I think he'd mostly be ok out there with AD. When AD was healthy, they were actually not that terrible together and AD said he liked playing with him.

Outside of that...he's a "name" that a tanking team could use to keep people showing up to games without him hurting their lottery odds.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Yeah, about the only way that I can see Russ having a role that can have a chance at working would be if he could be convinced to come off of the bench and be the captain of the 2nd unit. Then they could let Russ do his thing. On team with starters who play at a more deliberate pace, it could add another dimension similar to how the Mavs pace speeds up when Luka is out.

If he is still with the Lakers at the start of training camp, that is the approach I'd like to see them take. I wouldn't want him on the court with Lebron much at all. I think he'd mostly be ok out there with AD. When AD was healthy, they were actually not that terrible together and AD said he liked playing with him.

Outside of that...he's a "name" that a tanking team could use to keep people showing up to games without him hurting their lottery odds.

In a perfect world Russ and Lebron would be at about 28 and 32minutes each with overlap for about 10 of those.

 

[Robotech]

Yeah, about the only way that I can see Russ having a role that can have a chance at working would be if he could be convinced to come off of the bench and be the captain of the 2nd unit. Then they could let Russ do his thing. On team with starters who play at a more deliberate pace, it could add another dimension similar to how the Mavs pace speeds up when Luka is out.

If he is still with the Lakers at the start of training camp, that is the approach I'd like to see them take. I wouldn't want him on the court with Lebron much at all. I think he'd mostly be ok out there with AD. When AD was healthy, they were actually not that terrible together and AD said he liked playing with him.

Outside of that...he's a "name" that a tanking team could use to keep people showing up to games without him hurting their lottery odds.

Coming of the bench being a spark plug. I like that idea. He'll be one of those high energy, instant offense guys.

 

[trojanfan12]

Coming of the bench being a spark plug. I like that idea. He'll be one of those high energy, instant offense guys.

Now, he just has to be convinced of it. lol

 

[Robotech]

I was having this argument on reddit. The question is: are the Warriors currently still in a dynasty run? Of course, this doesn't mean that they will win another title beyond the three they've already won since the 2014-15 season, but some people are saying that the dynasty run definitely ended when they missed the playoffs.

My thinking is that because it was only 4 years ago that they last won a title and many core people remain, this is still part of the same run. I think that historians looking back on the Warriors dynasty team would mention this year as part of their run of success. If they somehow won three more titles starting this year (very unlikely, I know), then would people say that there were two separate Warriors dynasties that existed between 2014-2024? That would make no sense to me.

 

[CitySushi]

I was having this argument on reddit. The question is: are the Warriors currently still in a dynasty run? Of course, this doesn't mean that they will win another title beyond the three they've already won since the 2014-15 season, but some people are saying that the dynasty run definitely ended when they missed the playoffs.

My thinking is that because it was only 4 years ago that they last won a title and many core people remain, this is still part of the same run. I think that historians looking back on the Warriors dynasty team would mention this year as part of their run of success. If they somehow won three more titles starting this year (very unlikely, I know), then would people say that there were two separate Warriors dynasties that existed between 2014-2024? That would make no sense to me.

Considering Klay hasn't played for another team and if the Warriors make the finals, he himself will have played in 6 CONSECUTIVE NBA finals....I think an argument can be made that it is a singular "dynasty".

 

[calsnowskier]

Was the Spurs run a single Dynasty?

Were the Bulls a single dynasty, or 2 dynasties? Relatedly, were the Rockets a dynasty at all?

 

[trojanfan12]

I was having this argument on reddit. The question is: are the Warriors currently still in a dynasty run? Of course, this doesn't mean that they will win another title beyond the three they've already won since the 2014-15 season, but some people are saying that the dynasty run definitely ended when they missed the playoffs.

My thinking is that because it was only 4 years ago that they last won a title and many core people remain, this is still part of the same run. I think that historians looking back on the Warriors dynasty team would mention this year as part of their run of success. If they somehow won three more titles starting this year (very unlikely, I know), then would people say that there were two separate Warriors dynasties that existed between 2014-2024? That would make no sense to me.

Same core group. Same coach. There were a couple of years derailed by injury, including their last finals appearance. So yeah, seems like same run to me.

 

[msgkings322]

I was having this argument on reddit. The question is: are the Warriors currently still in a dynasty run? Of course, this doesn't mean that they will win another title beyond the three they've already won since the 2014-15 season, but some people are saying that the dynasty run definitely ended when they missed the playoffs.

My thinking is that because it was only 4 years ago that they last won a title and many core people remain, this is still part of the same run. I think that historians looking back on the Warriors dynasty team would mention this year as part of their run of success. If they somehow won three more titles starting this year (very unlikely, I know), then would people say that there were two separate Warriors dynasties that existed between 2014-2024? That would make no sense to me.

The big 3 and Kerr is what makes this team part of the same era. It's still one era.

 

[Robotech]

Considering Klay hasn't played for another team and if the Warriors make the finals, he himself will have played in 6 CONSECUTIVE NBA finals....I think an argument can be made that it is a singular "dynasty".

Definitely. I can't see how you can separate this team from the run of success, especially when you still have Kerr, Klay, Steph, and Dray still here. I would concede, however, that if Kerr were to have successful teams after the core three retire, then that would very likely be a new dynasty run. The only question I have about that is if those successful teams were led by players who were mentored by the core three, such as Poole, Kuminga, and Wiseman, then maybe it's still part of the same run. If the Spurs had kept Kawhi and were still contenders today, I would say that it's still part of the same Spurs dynasty run.

 

[msgkings322]

Was the Spurs run a single Dynasty?

Were the Bulls a single dynasty, or 2 dynasties? Relatedly, were the Rockets a dynasty at all?

Yes, single, and no

Bulls and Warriors are similar.

 

[Robotech]

The big 3 and Kerr is what makes this team part of the same era. It's still one era.

Exactly. For example, when I think of the '80s Lakers or the '80s Celtics, I think of that whole era, not just the years when they won. I don't think they ever missed the playoffs, though.

 

[msgkings322]

Exactly. For example, when I think of the '80s Lakers or the '80s Celtics, I think of that whole era, not just the years when they won. I don't think they ever missed the playoffs, though.

The story of the team will acknowledge the injury years, it's still one era

 

[Robotech]

Was the Spurs run a single Dynasty?

Were the Bulls a single dynasty, or 2 dynasties? Relatedly, were the Rockets a dynasty at all?

1. Yes, I view 1998 to 2014 as a single Spurs dynasty run.

2. Yes, the Bulls were a single dynasty under Jordan.

3. The Rockets were not a dynasty because I believe that you have to win 3 titles minimum to qualify as a dynasty. The Rockets were a repeat winner, and they did it back to back, which is very impressive, but they fall short of what is required to be a dynasty.

 

[msgkings322]

1. Yes, I view 1998 to 2014 as a single Spurs dynasty run.

2. Yes, the Bulls were a single dynasty under Jordan.

3. The Rockets were not a dynasty because I believe that you have to win 3 titles minimum to qualify as a dynasty. The Rockets were a repeat winner, and they did it back to back, which is very impressive, but they fall short of what is required to be a dynasty.

1. Agreed

2. Not just Jordan, Pippen and Phil too

3. It's just words but if the Rockets won only 2 titles but had other years in there making the Finals and stuff that might qualify, but they only had those 2 years of advancing deep in the playoffs.

 

[trojanfan12]

3. The Rockets were not a dynasty because I believe that you have to win 3 titles minimum to qualify as a dynasty. The Rockets were a repeat winner, and they did it back to back, which is very impressive, but short of what is required to be a dynasty.

I'd also add that their titles came during the Bulls run. While they did win back to back titles, they did it while MJ was playing baseball and they never faced the Bulls in the finals.

 

[calsnowskier]

The Spurs didn’t have the same core of players. That’s why I bring them into his conversation. But Popps was there the whole time, so maybe he is the glue that holds the whole thing together.

The Bulls had the key piece leave the league, allegedly by his choice (if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you…). Then he came back and they picked up almost exactly where they left off. And this is similar to the Dubs because one of the Dubs core 3 was gone for 2 years (though he was still in the org and he didn’t leave “by his choice”.