Golden State Warriors

[MizzouHawkGal]

Don't be a poor sport Hawk Lock. Just accept the Warriors can grind if needed but it isn't given they play basketball as Naismith envisioned it. Fast, high scoring and not a rugby scrum.

The current NFL is nothing like the creators envisioned or wanted, strike one and try again. At least you can't screw with baseball all that much.....I think.

 

[hawknation2016]

Doesn't bode well for the Cavs to get blown out on a night Curry and Klay were pretty much awful. Really don't see this match-up getting any better for them the rest of the way

Yeah, pretty predictable.

On 18 shot attempts in which Irving was the nearest defender, the Warriors had an effective field goal percentage (eFG%) of 66.7, according to data from the NBA’s player-tracking cameras. On the 13 shots in which Love was the nearest defender, the Warriors had an eFG% of 61.5. Both of those numbers are very bad.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/kev ... -warriors/

[youtube]zYjvHy0op4A[/youtube]
[youtube]1JoDjbHSgJA[/youtube]

 

[Hasselbeck]

Doesn't bode well for the Cavs to get blown out on a night Curry and Klay were pretty much awful. Really don't see this match-up getting any better for them the rest of the way

Yeah, pretty predictable.

On 18 shot attempts in which Irving was the nearest defender, the Warriors had an effective field goal percentage (eFG%) of 66.7, according to data from the NBA’s player-tracking cameras. On the 13 shots in which Love was the nearest defender, the Warriors had an eFG% of 61.5. Both of those numbers are very bad.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/kev ... -warriors/

[youtube]zYjvHy0op4A[/youtube]
[youtube]1JoDjbHSgJA[/youtube]

Only going to get worse too.. these percentage numbers are paired with the worst night of the season Steph/Klay had. That will not happen again.

 

[hawknation2016]

And the kicker . . .

Cleveland’s offense had its own problems — in 22 possessions, Andre Iguodala held LeBron James to 1-for-2 shooting — but it’s still a good bet that it’ll course-correct. The bigger concern for the Cavs is that any gains they make from improved shooting will drain out of the holes in their defense.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/kev ... -warriors/

 

[Hasselbeck]

I felt that LeBron played very passive in Game 1. It wasn't until the Warriors bench built that big lead that he started to show a little more urgency. I love LeBron, but I feel sometimes his unselfishness really acts as a detriment towards his game. MJ, Kobe, Isiah Thomas.. those dudes would go for your throat when blood was in the water.

Of course it probably didn't help that Kyrie went into 1-on-1 ISO ball and turned into a black hole on offense too.

 

[Hawk-Lock]

I felt that LeBron played very passive in Game 1. It wasn't until the Warriors bench built that big lead that he started to show a little more urgency. I love LeBron, but I feel sometimes his unselfishness really acts as a detriment towards his game. MJ, Kobe, Isiah Thomas.. those dudes would go for your throat when blood was in the water.

Of course it probably didn't help that Kyrie went into 1-on-1 ISO ball and turned into a black hole on offense too.

I agree with you about LeBron. I thought he came out really aggressive in the first quarter, and then played too passively the rest of the game. I think he comes out and asserts himself in game 2, I'd be pretty surprised if he doesn't score at least 30 tomorrow. I don't see the Cleveland role players having big games in GS, so it's on LeBron to put the team on his back on the road.

 

[knownone]

I don't know how you go about game planning for a team whose two best players are as dangerous off the ball as they are on it, but that's what Cleveland was trying to do in game one, and it worked, they held Curry and Thompson to their lowest combined points per game in their careers. Yet in the end Cleveland loses by 15, why? because outside of Lebron Cleveland doesn't match up well anywhere. Hell! even Lebron doesn't match up well, Golden State has 5 guys who regularly contribute who are capable of not only guarding Lebron but making it incredibly hard on him as well.

I don't know if the Eastern Conference is as awful as it seems, or if the NBA is just weak as a whole, but this could very well be a sweep, and i'll be damned if the Warriors aren't considered the most dominant team of the modern era after a sweep. Is it justified though? I'd love to know what others think, as I'm not sure the Cavs are even a top 5 team in the West.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

The Warriors have to at least be in the conversation as greatest team if they win the series and damn well better be no lower then top 3 if they sweep.

 

[hawknation2016]

OAKLAND, Calif. -- Game 1 of the NBA Finals between Golden State and Cleveland was the most watched and highest-rated opening game on ABC, with 19.2 million people tuning in for an 11.1 U.S. household rating.

Nielsen said ABC eclipsed the previous viewership high of 17,768,000 by 8 percent, a mark set last year between the two teams. The viewership number was the biggest for a Game 1 on any network since 1998. The game peaked from 10:45-11 p.m. ET with 22,610,000 viewers and a 12.9 rating.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/15934 ... -cavaliers

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Greatness is pretty easy to spot you know. I almost feel bad for Labron but nothing east of St. Louis actually exists to me.

 

[Hasselbeck]

The Warriors have to at least be in the conversation as greatest team if they win the series and damn well better be no lower then top 3 if they sweep.

I think a sweep is much more likely than a 6 or 7 game series, that said.. their place in history is very hard to place. I think they're unquestionably the best team of the last 10 years if they win the title. But the NBA changes drastically decade over decade. I don't think they're better than the 96 Bulls team, I think the 2001 Lakers team probably runs over them too. Then there are the Celtics, the Showtime Era of the Lakers, the Bucks with Kareem and the Big O, and so forth.

The NBA to me is like MLB in that context matters a LOT when comparing different eras.

 

[Hasselbeck]

I don't know how you go about game planning for a team whose two best players are as dangerous off the ball as they are on it, but that's what Cleveland was trying to do in game one, and it worked, they held Curry and Thompson to their lowest combined points per game in their careers. Yet in the end Cleveland loses by 15, why? because outside of Lebron Cleveland doesn't match up well anywhere. Hell! even Lebron doesn't match up well, Golden State has 5 guys who regularly contribute who are capable of not only guarding Lebron but making it incredibly hard on him as well.

Splitting your post into two but I think they're both interesting takes. First of all, tackling Game 1 and their strategy... I think the Cavs definitely paid a lot of attention to the Splash Brothers, and rightfully so, but I hear a lot of people saying that the Warriors role guys went off because of the extra attention paid to their backcourt and I disagree. Curry and Thompson had several wide open looks and just simply could not make them. It happens in basketball sometimes, it just RARELY happens with this team because Curry and Thompson are the two best shooters in the game right now. I think you touched upon the Cavs real issue at hand, and it's what I've been preaching since before the series began in that Cleveland does not match up with this team AT ALL. Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love simply do not defend, and the Warriors have the defenders to nullify Kevin Love's offense enough to where the Cavs are really in trouble. If Love scores 15-17 PPG but gives up twice that.. Golden State is obviously beyond giddy at that trade off. We already saw this in Game 1 where Andrew Bogut, Harrison Barnes and Draymond Green all attacked Love with ease. That's not changing any time soon.

Same with Kyrie Irving, Shaun Livingston just torched him. When Curry gets going, and it will happen, that's just another thorn in the Cavs backside.

LeBron is the best defensive player in the game, so I disagree that he doesn't match up well on either side of the ball in this series. But the issue goes much deeper than that in this series. This matchup reminds me so much of Spurs-Heat in the 2014 Finals in that the Spurs were absolutely loaded at every position, had the vastly superior coach and the championship pedigree (the Spurs had extra motivation from blowing Game 6 in that series and losing the title in 7) .. and the Heat just had... LeBron trying to cover up weaknesses from every other position on the floor. While this years Cavs team will probably get more production from Kyrie Irving than that Heat team got from Dwyane Wade .. the parallels on defense are all there. Chalmers, Wade, Bosh .. all were huge liabilities on the floor for Miami in that series .. and the Spurs just sent wave after wave after wave at them.

I think that's ultimately how this years Finals will wind up, and why I felt the Cavs best chance at a title died in OKC when Golden State won Game 6.

I don't know if the Eastern Conference is as awful as it seems, or if the NBA is just weak as a whole, but this could very well be a sweep, and i'll be damned if the Warriors aren't considered the most dominant team of the modern era after a sweep. Is it justified though? I'd love to know what others think, as I'm not sure the Cavs are even a top 5 team in the West.

The East as a whole is arguably slightly better than the West as a whole IMO. It's just that the powerhouse teams outside of Cleveland all resided in the East. The Cavs are just the victim of having to face the one team they have no answer for. Sports go that way sometimes. I cited Super Bowl 48 before the series as a nice example for how those two styles matched up and why it resulted in a blowout. I firmly believe if San Fran somehow beat Seattle in the NFCCG that year that Denver would have beat the 49ers because their offense matched up a lot better against the Niners defense than it did against ours. Well, same for this series.. instead of Cleveland facing a 2-star team in OKC, with one of those stars playing the same position as the best defensive player in the game.. they drew a Golden State team that has two guards with range from 30+ feet, a bench that could arguably be a low seed playoff team in either conference, a coach that's won a lot of championships, and a slew of 2-way players that can defend any position on the floor. It was their biggest nightmare coming to life.

 

[Hawk-Lock]

Embarrassing game from the Cavs. I will just say this, Tyronn Lue is a joke of a coach. Everyone already knew this, it's not like winning the East meant anything. Anyone on this forum could have coached the Cavs to first place in the East.

My favorite part of the Blatt firing and Lue hiring fiasco was that they offered Lue a big contract extension before he even coached his first game. Zero chance he makes it through that contract. And at this rate, he may not make it til next season. I don't need to know anything about you as a coach or person, but when you get blown out in back-to-back games in the finals, you suck at coaching. This is exactly why you don't let players (LeBron) play the role of GM.

 

[hawkfan68]

The difference between LBJ and Jordan is clear. LBJ doesn't make the guys around him better. MJ did. That's why MJ has 6 championships. The only way LBJ gets those is if he has established superstars like Wade and Bosh on the team with him. Kevin Love and Kyrie Irving are nowhere close to those guys. Golden State wins without Stephon Curry. They play the game as a team and that's why they will win this series and repeat.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

The Warriors have to at least be in the conversation as greatest team if they win the series and damn well better be no lower then top 3 if they sweep.

I think a sweep is much more likely than a 6 or 7 game series, that said.. their place in history is very hard to place. I think they're unquestionably the best team of the last 10 years if they win the title. But the NBA changes drastically decade over decade. I don't think they're better than the 96 Bulls team, I think the 2001 Lakers team probably runs over them too. Then there are the Celtics, the Showtime Era of the Lakers, the Bucks with Kareem and the Big O, and so forth.

The NBA to me is like MLB in that context matters a LOT when comparing different eras.

Decades aren't eras. The NBA is what the NFL is starting to become. A game that changes the rules too much and too fast thereby giving the game no baseline. MLB has four distinct eras....dead ball, pitcher mound change, steroid, current.

 

[Throwdown]

The difference between LBJ and Jordan is clear. LBJ doesn't make the guys around him better. MJ did. That's why MJ has 6 championships. The only way LBJ gets those is if he has established superstars like Wade and Bosh on the team with him. Kevin Love and Kyrie Irving are nowhere close to those guys. Golden State wins without Stephon Curry. They play the game as a team and that's why they will win this series and repeat.

Meh I thought we deaded that comparison years ago.

I don't see how they even compare the two, Lebron is more Magic than MJ. What happened tonight was disgusting, I just wish they'd attack the basket and stop trying to be cute.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Embarrassing game from the Cavs. I will just say this, Tyronn Lue is a joke of a coach. Everyone already knew this, it's not like winning the East meant anything. Anyone on this forum could have coached the Cavs to first place in the East.

My favorite part of the Blatt firing and Lue hiring fiasco was that they offered Lue a big contract extension before he even coached his first game. Zero chance he makes it through that contract. And at this rate, he may not make it til next season. I don't need to know anything about you as a coach or person, but when you get blown out in back-to-back games in the finals, you suck at coaching. This is exactly why you don't let players (LeBron) play the role of GM.

The Cavs could have 1996 Phil Jackson and would still lose this in 4 or 5.

This is just an extremely one-sided matchup, nothing else. Not to say Lue is not a coach that needs some improvement, but the Warriors just outclass them at every position aside from the 3, and that's just because of LeBron. Even then, their mantra "strength in numbers" has never been more evident than it is now. The Cavs are basically trying to patch up holes in a dam with Fruit Stripe gum.

 

[Hasselbeck]

The Warriors have to at least be in the conversation as greatest team if they win the series and damn well better be no lower then top 3 if they sweep.

I think a sweep is much more likely than a 6 or 7 game series, that said.. their place in history is very hard to place. I think they're unquestionably the best team of the last 10 years if they win the title. But the NBA changes drastically decade over decade. I don't think they're better than the 96 Bulls team, I think the 2001 Lakers team probably runs over them too. Then there are the Celtics, the Showtime Era of the Lakers, the Bucks with Kareem and the Big O, and so forth.

The NBA to me is like MLB in that context matters a LOT when comparing different eras.

Decades aren't eras. The NBA is what the NFL is starting to become. A game that changes the rules too much and too fast thereby giving the game no baseline. MLB has four distinct eras....dead ball, pitcher mound change, steroid, current.

Eh I disagree with that. Rule changes certainly changed the game, but the skill has changed too. The NBA has evolved from a sport where if you had a dominant big man (Russell, Wilt, Hakeem, Ewing, Shaq, Duncan just to name a few) you were going to have a shot at a title, into a sport where if you have shooters you are going to have a shot at a title.

The Warriors just have shooters galore, and the right blend of players that can play 3 or 4 positions on the floor. Sure the rules help those shooters out, but the game is just changing too. And now that Steph Curry is this amazing player to behold, more and more kids that play basketball - go to college, etc are going to be patterning this mantra of being a 3 point shooter first and foremost. Very similarly to how the quarterback position has evolved, and how offenses as a whole have evolved in football.

 

[Hasselbeck]

The difference between LBJ and Jordan is clear. LBJ doesn't make the guys around him better. MJ did. That's why MJ has 6 championships. The only way LBJ gets those is if he has established superstars like Wade and Bosh on the team with him. Kevin Love and Kyrie Irving are nowhere close to those guys. Golden State wins without Stephon Curry. They play the game as a team and that's why they will win this series and repeat.

I hate this take. It's lazy. It's wrong.

Without LeBron, Cleveland is in the lotto. Yes, the East is weak and that helps the Cavs get to the Finals. But to say LeBron doesn't make his teammates better is flat wrong.

Also you talk up MJ like he was playing with the Washington State Cougars as his supporting cast. He had a Top 30 player in Scottie Pippen in his prime (who was so good that he nearly took the Bulls back to the Finals when MJ was playing baseball), a guy like Dennis Rodman who was just perfect for that era of basketball, and numerous role players that were very under-appreciated.

Also Curry had a pretty good game last night, he just didn't play a lot of minutes because of foul trouble. The Warriors are just stacked at the positions where Cleveland is very weak. That doesn't mean LeBron is the sole reason this team is about to lose in 4 or 5 games.. sometimes you just run into the better team in sports and get waxed. It happens.

If you look at LeBron's career, I feel like the only time his teams appeared in the Finals and were the clear, no doubt better team was the year he choked against the Mavs and the year they beat the Thunder. That's it. Two of the three losses to San Antonio involved LeBron's teams paling in comparison in talent to the Spurs team. The 2013 team that won in 7 was evenly matched with that team and that's why it was a nail biting series.

Conversely you look at those Bulls teams and all 6 times Jordan appeared in the Finals, those teams were better than their opponent.

Star talent matters in this sport, but match-ups matter so much more. LeBron has run into a historically great Warriors team for two straight years, a Spurs team in the midst of their dynasty and another Spurs team loaded with talent and fueled by anger after a series loss the year before + the Heat roster just aging at the wrong time. Nothing LeBron could do about that.

 

[Uncle Si]

The Bulls series with the Blazers, Jazz and Sonics were toss ups at Game 1. All three of those teams had loaded rosters and were primed to beat the Bulls.

Jordan took over those series in key moments (Blazers game 1, Jazz game 6, Sonics first two games). I don't think it's quite fair to suggest that he and his team had easy victories.

Jordan at many points in his career did what Lebron did, took his team to the Finals on his own, literally. Jordan, however, was a much more influential all around player than Lebron and I think that helped when the Bulls maybe didnt have a clear advantage. We have not seen that from Lebron since the decision.