Is Steve Kerr essentially done in this league?

[purguy12]

So, you're telling me Golden State was better when Bogut was on the floor? Then why were they -25 with him in the lineup? You still can't explain that part away. Like I said, you don't know how causal analysis works. You're making up a connection between Bogut playing and their record when it's coincidental. Actual, real data shows they were much worse with him on the floor than on the bench. There's no easier way I can explain this to you, and despite having no way of combatting my point you insist that you're right. That's basically the definition of ignorance.

Because they were 3-1 and he kept the rotations together. With Bogut they kept their Depth and didnt have to play Ezeli and Side show bob. Game 7 Sideshow Bob was -9 Ezeli -9. Thats already a -18 from that Position in 1 game. Game 6: Ezeli a -17. That is not good. The games GS won Bogut was overall a +4 I think. The Blow out game every GS player was in the Negative by a lot. So your numbers really are messed up a little. Still overall Bogut +- was better then the 2 players that took his spot. Then on top of that you take away Depth.

Im done talking about it. Its like talking to a wall. I never heard someone say thank god a starter got hurt even though we were 3-1 with him and 0-3 with out him.

Injuries change everything especially during the series. Game 5 no Green and Bogut, game 6 Iggy gets hurt and no Bogut, Game 7 No Bogut and Iggy is still hurt. These things matter. Now Like I said like 10 posts ago its still no excuse. GS should of closed them out. As a fan I would like to see Rd3 with both teams being healthy.

 

[Across The Field]

Because they were 3-1 and he kept the rotations together. With Bogut they kept their Depth and didnt have to play Ezeli and Side show bob. Game 7 Sideshow Bob was -9 Ezeli -9. Thats already a -18 from that Position in 1 game. Game 6: Ezeli a -17. That is not good. The games GS won Bogut was overall a +4 I think. The Blow out game every GS player was in the Negative by a lot. So your numbers really are messed up a little. Still overall Bogut +- was better then the 2 players that took his spot. Then on top of that you take away Depth.

Im done talking about it. Its like talking to a wall. I never heard someone say thank god a starter got hurt even though we were 3-1 with him and 0-3 with out him.

Injuries change everything especially during the series. Game 5 no Green and Bogut, game 6 Iggy gets hurt and no Bogut, Game 7 No Bogut and Iggy is still hurt. These things matter. Now Like I said like 10 posts ago its still no excuse. GS should of closed them out. As a fan I would like to see Rd3 with both teams being healthy.

I've never once said it's easy to replace a starter. What I'm saying is it's not like he was this game-changing player like you're making him out to be. You're basically insinuating that GS was 3-1 BECAUSE of Bogut, which is obviously idiotic considering he only had one somewhat decent game the entire series. His loss just simply wasn't that big of a deal, which is backed up by his awful +/-. Just that simple.

 

[purguy12]

I've never once said it's easy to replace a starter. What I'm saying is it's not like he was this game-changing player like you're making him out to be. You're basically insinuating that GS was 3-1 BECAUSE of Bogut, which is obviously idiotic considering he only had one somewhat decent game the entire series. His loss just simply wasn't that big of a deal, which is backed up by his awful +/-. Just that simple.

He isnt a game changer but it change the game plan for GS. I still think they should of closed out the Cavs and didnt. thats on them. Like i said I just want to see Rd3 when both teams are healthy. Both teams beat each other in the Finals when both teams were banged up. Yes Cavs were more banged up but overall both were hurt. Thats all. Not taking anything away from the Cavs. This is on top of my list for best championships. The only one I can think of that is better is the Wild card Giants beating the 18-0 Pats.

 

[Across The Field]

He isnt a game changer but it change the game plan for GS. I still think they should of closed out the Cavs and didnt. thats on them. Like i said I just want to see Rd3 when both teams are healthy. Both teams beat each other in the Finals when both teams were banged up. Yes Cavs were more banged up but overall both were hurt. Thats all. Not taking anything away from the Cavs. This is on top of my list for best championships. The only one I can think of that is better is the Wild card Giants beating the 18-0 Pats.

Fair enough

 

[purguy12]

Fair enough

ok

 

[Tai Chi≈Surfing]

I've never once said it's easy to replace a starter. What I'm saying is it's not like he was this game-changing player like you're making him out to be. You're basically insinuating that GS was 3-1 BECAUSE of Bogut, which is obviously idiotic considering he only had one somewhat decent game the entire series. His loss just simply wasn't that big of a deal, which is backed up by his awful +/-. Just that simple.

Just agree to accept the fact that missing Bogut hurt the Dubs, and helped the Cavs in the last 3 games.
No low post presence in the paint for rim protection = advantage Cavs.

 

[handicappers]

bogut was straight up ballin' with those 11 minutes per game. man he was missed.

 

[Across The Field]

Just agree to accept the fact that missing Bogut hurt the Dubs, and helped the Cavs in the last 3 games.
No low post presence in the paint for rim protection = advantage Cavs.

It didn't help the W's, but it was pretty low on the list of main reasons why Cleveland won.

 

[Tai Chi≈Surfing]

It didn't help the W's, but it was pretty low on the list of main reasons why Cleveland won.

I wouldn't say low.....but it indeed was a factor.
Denying that only makes you look sillier.

 

[CitySushi]

bogut was straight up ballin' with those 11 minutes per game. man he was missed.

Those 11 minutes are critical, when you think about Varaejo or Ezeli having to pick those minutes up. I'm 100% serious too.

 

[Across The Field]

I wouldn't say low.....but it indeed was a factor.
Denying that only makes you look sillier.

Haha, no it doesn't. He was not much of a factor at all. As was mentioned, he hardly even played when he was healthy, and as I pointed out his +/- was shit. It was definitely low on the list.

 

[Tai Chi≈Surfing]

bogut was straight up ballin' with those 11 minutes per game. man he was missed.

another non sequitur, posted by señor strawman.

Yeeesh.

 

[Tai Chi≈Surfing]

Haha, no it doesn't. He was not much of a factor at all. As was mentioned, he hardly even played when he was healthy, and as I pointed out his +/- was shit. It was definitely low on the list.

well if you choose to keep on looking silly that's on you.

have fun.

 

[Across The Field]

well if you choose to keep looking silly that's on you.

have fun.

I'm sure I'll sleep just fine knowing my Cavs took care of business, enjoy your sour grapes though.

 

[Across The Field]

Those 11 minutes are critical, when you think about Varaejo or Ezeli having to pick those minutes up. I'm 100% serious too.

They shouldn't have been critical though. That's the point. The guy wasn't that good, so to look at it as being some big deal looks like a very flimsy excuse. There were superstars all over the court for GS.

 

[Tai Chi≈Surfing]

I'm sure I'll sleep just fine knowing my Cavs took care of business, enjoy your sour grapes though.

I don't do sour grapes, son...I'm just serving up genuine lemonade from the constant lemons you and your fellow cavfanboyz keep throwing out there by virtue of your refusal to acknowledge facts.

 

[handicappers]

I'm sure I'll sleep just fine knowing my Cavs took care of business, enjoy your sour grapes though.

those aren't just sour grapes, they're bandwagon sour grapes. More pulp

 

[Across The Field]

I don't do sour grapes, son...I'm just serving up genuine lemonade from the constant lemons you and your fellow cavfanboyz refuse to acknowledge.

We're not acknowledging lemons? The fuck does that mean?

 

[CitySushi]

They shouldn't have been critical though. That's the point. The guy wasn't that good, so to look at it as being some big deal looks like a very flimsy excuse. There were superstars all over the court for GS.

It's kind of like the lesser of two evils, IMO.

While Bogut wasn't good, he wasn't a pure net negative while he was out on the court (despite the plus/minus). Varaejo and Ezeli were so bad out there. Bogut was at the very least on offense a great screen setter and a great passer. He doesn't get enough credit for what he does away from the hoop. You won't even notice a lot of what he does for the offense specifically just by looking at the box score.

I'm not saying Bogut would have made a significant difference, but in this series he could have provided a boost. His importance this year was much more significant because Barnes was so terrible.

If Barnes were just half-way decent, I would 100% agree that Bogut was a non-factor. Being that Barnes was not good, at all, Bogut would/could have played a larger role in game 7. Not taking away from the Cavs. Bogut is not as important as some say on here, but he's also not a throw away like some have suggested either.

 

[Tai Chi≈Surfing]

those aren't just sour grapes, they're bandwagon sour grapes. More pulp

that's not just trolling...that's real 100% trite texass trolling right there.....