Stupid warriors

cowens/oldschool wrote:I don't have to tell you that Lebron led the Finals in every statistical category and it was first time that was ever done....when a point guard avg's more turnovers than assists, I'd say your in trouble.

I get it. You hate Curry. And that's fine.

I don't know him, why would I hate him?

steve3344 wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:I don't have to tell you that Lebron led the Finals in every statistical category and it was first time that was ever done....when a point guard avg's more turnovers than assists, I'd say your in trouble.

I get it.  You hate Curry.  And that's fine.  

if a player wants to take on the title/mantle of best player or best team ever, he better be thick skinned and have a game that backs that up and a really deep strong in depth game like say a Larry, Magic, Michael, etc. When his outside shot wasn't working Curry couldn't go to anything else, live by the 3 die by the 3.....all he needed was a simple get the ball in a good position to Klay or DG or anyone, but one bad play after another, his TO's killed any momentum his team was in process of picking up, KILLED it, airballs?? either he couldn't make a simple play or the defense was too good and the first player on him was Kyrie, who while playing outstanding defense for him is not exactly Avery Bradley or Marcus Smart either. He had a favorable match up and should have been able to do something, anything for his team if hes a real 2 time MVP with all these yada yada credentials. He got exposed, he is a great shooter, best player in the league.....thats a joke!!!!!

cowens/oldschool wrote:

steve3344 wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:I don't have to tell you that Lebron led the Finals in every statistical category and it was first time that was ever done....when a point guard avg's more turnovers than assists, I'd say your in trouble.

I get it.  You hate Curry.  And that's fine.  

if a player wants to take on the title/mantle of best player or best team ever, he better be thick skinned and have a game that backs that up and a really deep strong in depth game like say a Larry, Magic, Michael, etc. When his outside shot wasn't working Curry couldn't go to anything else, live by the 3 die by the 3.....all he needed was a simple get the ball in a good position to Klay or DG or anyone, but one bad play after another, his TO's killed any momentum his team was in process of picking up, KILLED it, airballs?? either he couldn't make a simple play or the defense was too good and the first player on him was Kyrie, who while playing outstanding defense for him is not exactly Avery Bradley or Marcus Smart either. He had a favorable match up and should have been able to do something, anything for his team if hes a real 2 time MVP with all these yada yada credentials. He got exposed, he is a great shooter, best player in the league.....thats a joke!!!!!

Cowens,

First of all, nobody has said that Steph Curry wants to take on "the title/mantle of best player or best team ever".  That is a straw man.  He won the MVP the last two years because he was considered the MOST VALUABLE in those two years.  What did you think?  Did you think they'd say "well, you know, the league is so weak now, maybe we should give the MVP to 59 year-old Larry Bird because he deserves the title/mantle of one of the best players on one of the best teams ever"?

I looked up the games we played against GSW over those past 2 years.  4 games, total.


2014-2015

Steph Curry - 23.8ppg, 52.8% 2pt fg%, 44.3% 3pt fg%, 59.4% efg%, 7.7 apg, 3.1TOpg.  286 3pt fgm.
Avery Bradley - 13.9ppg, 42.9% fg%


In GSW
1/25/15 - 37.5% fg%, 45.4% 2pt fg%, 20% 3pt fg%, 11 assists, 3 TOs, 22 points.
Bradley 15 points, 31.3% fg%


In BOS
3/1/15 - 63.6% fg%, 56.2% 2pt fg%, 62.5% 3pt fg%, 5 assists, 5 TOs.  37 points.
Bradley 12 points, 29.4% fg%


2015-2016

Steph Curry - 30.1ppg, 56.6% 2pt fg%, 45.4% 3pt fg%, 63% efg%, 6.7 apg, 3.3TOpg.  402 3pt fgm.
Avery Bradley - 15.2ppg, 44.7%


In BOS
12/11/15 - 33% fg%, 21.4% 2pt fg%, 46.2% 3pt fg%, 11 rebs, 8 assists, 8 TOs.  38 points.
Bradley 19 points, 42% fg%

In GSW
4/1/16 - 47.4% fg%, 20% 2pt fg%, 57.1% 3pt fg%, 6 assists, 9 TOs.  29 points.
Bradley 15 points, 41.7% fg%


So, what do we have here?  We have him shooting under his normal fg% BUT we also have him averaging >29 points against us in 2014-15 (6 points over his average) and 33.5 points against us in 2015-16 (2.4 points more than his average).  In short, he scored more than his average in both of those MVP seasons.  We made him work for his points, but he got them and that was with Bradley on him.  He got more than his average with one of the top defensive guards in the league on him.  And you say he can't play when he's being pressured?

On the other side of the ball, Bradley had a good game, 19 points when he was averaging 15/game but no break outs.  


I'm not suggesting Bradley should have played even with Curry, of course not, but to say that Curry plays poorly against a good defender is a questionable statement UNLESS you think that Kyrie Irving is THAT much better a defender than Bradley.  Do you?


bob


.

Cowens giving Curry the Olynyk treatment. Injury no excuse.

I don't see where Curry was injured in the Finals. He was superb the last three games against OKC. Injury or not, this was definitely a sub par series for him, but he still did have two AMAZING seasons and deserves props. Maybe not as much as Lebron deserves kudos, but props nonetheless.

cowens/oldschool wrote:over the top? I was nice, I didn't even mention how much he turns the ball over and over and over, hes the fockin MVP and can't even guard other players at his position? Kyrie wanted him and played the best defense of his life on Steph, if he was a real player with any balls at all, he wouldn't let his coach always protect his pussy ass. Russell Weatbrook is one thing, I agree he needs protecting from that force, but Kyrie? come on man, Kyrie is 5'!!", that was pathetic. NOW I'm bashing....,,,, the system oriented star that is a product of the system, more than best player, no way is he best player in the league!!!! Hes not even best point in his conference, he should have figured out a way to feed Thompson or Green in that 4th and failed bigtime when one or two good old fashioned passes could have easily led to his team winning game 7.

cowens/oldschool wrote:if a player wants to take on the title/mantle of best player or best team ever, he better be thick skinned and have a game that backs that up and a really deep strong in depth game like say a Larry, Magic, Michael, etc. When his outside shot wasn't working Curry couldn't go to anything else, live by the 3 die by the 3.....all he needed was a simple get the ball in a good position to Klay or DG or anyone, but one bad play after another, his TO's killed any momentum his team was in process of picking up, KILLED it, airballs?? either he couldn't make a simple play or the defense was too good and the first player on him was Kyrie, who while playing outstanding defense for him is not exactly Avery Bradley or Marcus Smart either. He had a favorable match up and should have been able to do something, anything for his team if hes a real 2 time MVP with all these yada yada credentials. He got exposed, he is a great shooter, best player in the league.....thats a joke!!!!!

It was an interesting season, to say the least. One thing that became forcefully apparent, to me anyway, is the way many people form their attitudes toward elite sports stars. There are many people who dislike LeBron, for a variety of reasons -- the way he left Cleveland and Miami to form superfriends teams, the unprecedented control he has over the Cavs and the passive-aggressive way he exerts that control, his ball-dominant hero-ball style, and on it goes. The criticism mounted through game 4 of the finals, with everyone who hated him eager to label him a second-rate loser for getting to the finals so often but coming up short. The hate was strong. But after three all-time great performances by LeBron, the Cavs won the series, and the consensus is now that LeBron has moved firmly into the echelon of all-time greats.

Curry presented a different example. He was generally well-liked and popular, but the "get off my lawn" old-timers combined with the Warriors tremendous regular season spawned a backlash against the team in general and Curry in particular. After a less-than-dominant playoffs and coming up short against the Cavs, the criticism against the team and Curry has amped up hugely. The Warrior haters, and especially the Curry haters, are out in force.

The thing is, with less than a minute to go in game 7, the game was tied, 89-89. Whether LeBron is a five-time loser or an all-time great, whether the Warriors are back-to-back champs or the ultimate disappointment after going 73-9, and whether Curry is the leader of a repeat champion or exposed as a fraud, all that is decided by who makes the last shot? To make such a polarizing judgment of an eight-month season, two-year run, or 13-year career based on 57 seconds?

There's nothing logical about that, but that's because the people making black or white judgments, anointing someone as an all-time great or labeling them as trash, are making that choice based on emotion, not logic. If we use logic, the picture is filled with gray, not just black or white.

Through the first four games of the finals, LeBron was seriously subpar by his standards; he was averaging almost six turnovers per game, afraid to take a shot outside the paint, and alternated between being tentative and reverting to hero ball, for which both he and Kyrie were crucified in the media. He led his team to victory in these finals, but he was hugely disappointing in the 2011 finals against Dallas. His play was a huge reason why Miami won in 2012 and 2013, but his individual stardom was rendered irrelevant by superior team play in 2014 and 2015. A true assessment of him requires acknowledging both the good and bad, the times he has come up short as well as the times he's been a transcendent player.

It's the same with Curry. Just because he had a poor postseason doesn't invalidate his fantastic regular season. Others may see it differently, but having watched most of his games these past two seasons, it was obvious to me that he was physically limited in these playoffs. He played really well only three times -- before he got hurt in game 1 against Houston (24 points on 8-13 from the field, including 5-7 on threes, in less than 20 minutes), in his first game back against Portland, and in game 7 against OKC. He had a couple of other games where he was good but generally showed flashes of his MVP self on occasionally and was all too often a shadow of the player he was during the regular season.

Some may say that's because he choked on the big stage, but what I saw was a guy who was physically limited -- being an outstanding finisher at the rim during the season but missing even uncontested layups in the playoffs, able to make Kawhi Leonard look silly during the season but unable to shake Kevin Love one-on-one on the perimeter in the finals, giving up the ball when he had a favorable matchup on a switch when he normally feasts on that situation. At the start of the series, the Cavs double-teamed Curry and left other guys wide open under the basket, but by the end, he could barely get past anybody. Part of that is due to good defense by the Cavs, but he's seen tough, physical defense for quite a while now and thrived against it.

The Warriors have their title from last year, rightly earned, and their future remains bright. There is a narrative that this is the second poor finals for Curry, but that's false. Last year, he averaged 26.0 points, 5.2 rebounds, 6.3 assists, and 1.8 steals. He was especially productive and efficient in games 4-6, all Golden State wins. He was their MVP of the finals, even if the award went to Iguodala.

Curry did have a poor finals this year. He was well enough to play, so he has to take the criticism for his play. Some of it has nothing to do with any injury, such as his penchant for risky passes, such as the behind-the-back attempt at the end of game 7 (he does that way too much, and it drives me nuts, and that was a really poor decision). Their ultimate failure in a finals they should've won is a burden they must bear, Curry and Kerr in particular, but they can use this to make them stronger and better. Whether they will, time will tell. Magic Johnson was labeled a choker after the 1984 finals, but he used that experience to push himself and his team to greater heights.

In the meantime, the haters are having their day. I'm disappointed that Curry wasn't able to show what he can do on the biggest stage, but I don't understand this mindset of looking at this performance and thinking he "has no balls," calling him a "pussy ass," and saying he got "exposed." You can keep your black-or-white judgment and ignore the gray, but I've seen what this guy can do, and my money is on him.

bobheckler wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:

steve3344 wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:I don't have to tell you that Lebron led the Finals in every statistical category and it was first time that was ever done....when a point guard avg's more turnovers than assists, I'd say your in trouble.

I get it.  You hate Curry.  And that's fine.  

if a player wants to take on the title/mantle of best player or best team ever, he better be thick skinned and have a game that backs that up and a really deep strong in depth game like say a Larry, Magic, Michael, etc. When his outside shot wasn't working Curry couldn't go to anything else, live by the 3 die by the 3.....all he needed was a simple get the ball in a good position to Klay or DG or anyone, but one bad play after another, his TO's killed any momentum his team was in process of picking up, KILLED it, airballs?? either he couldn't make a simple play or the defense was too good and the first player on him was Kyrie, who while playing outstanding defense for him is not exactly Avery Bradley or Marcus Smart either. He had a favorable match up and should have been able to do something, anything for his team if hes a real 2 time MVP with all these yada yada credentials. He got exposed, he is a great shooter, best player in the league.....thats a joke!!!!!

Cowens,

First of all, nobody has said that Steph Curry wants to take on "the title/mantle of best player or best team ever".  That is a straw man.  He won the MVP the last two years because he was considered the MOST VALUABLE in those two years.  What did you think?  Did you think they'd say "well, you know, the league is so weak now, maybe we should give the MVP to 59 year-old Larry Bird because he deserves the title/mantle of one of the best players on one of the best teams ever"?

I looked up the games we played against GSW over those past 2 years.  4 games, total.


2014-2015

Steph Curry - 23.8ppg, 52.8% 2pt fg%, 44.3% 3pt fg%, 59.4% efg%, 7.7 apg, 3.1TOpg.  286 3pt fgm.
Avery Bradley - 13.9ppg, 42.9% fg%


In GSW
1/25/15 - 37.5% fg%, 45.4% 2pt fg%, 20% 3pt fg%, 11 assists, 3 TOs, 22 points.
Bradley 15 points, 31.3% fg%


In BOS
3/1/15 - 63.6% fg%, 56.2% 2pt fg%, 62.5% 3pt fg%, 5 assists, 5 TOs.  37 points.
Bradley 12 points, 29.4% fg%


2015-2016

Steph Curry - 30.1ppg, 56.6% 2pt fg%, 45.4% 3pt fg%, 63% efg%, 6.7 apg, 3.3TOpg.  402 3pt fgm.
Avery Bradley - 15.2ppg, 44.7%


In BOS
12/11/15 - 33% fg%, 21.4% 2pt fg%, 46.2% 3pt fg%, 11 rebs, 8 assists, 8 TOs.  38 points.
Bradley 19 points, 42% fg%

In GSW
4/1/16 - 47.4% fg%, 20% 2pt fg%, 57.1% 3pt fg%, 6 assists, 9 TOs.  29 points.
Bradley 15 points, 41.7% fg%


So, what do we have here?  We have him shooting under his normal fg% BUT we also have him averaging >29 points against us in 2014-15 (6 points over his average) and 33.5 points against us in 2015-16 (2.4 points more than his average).  In short, he scored more than his average in both of those MVP seasons.  We made him work for his points, but he got them and that was with Bradley on him.  He got more than his average with one of the top defensive guards in the league on him.  And you say he can't play when he's being pressured?

On the other side of the ball, Bradley had a good game, 19 points when he was averaging 15/game but no break outs.  


I'm not suggesting Bradley should have played even with Curry, of course not, but to say that Curry plays poorly against a good defender is a questionable statement UNLESS you think that Kyrie Irving is THAT much better a defender than Bradley.  Do you?


bob


.

bob you just confirmed that Avery Bradley's defense is very effective against Curry and we match up with them very well. In the game in Boston they won and Curry shot 9-27 from the field with 8 turnovers....I'll take that. In the game we stopped their home winning streak Curry had 9 turnovers....imagine if we had avg rim protection, not piss poor with Sully, KO and Z, so its not like AB had alot of help. 17 turnovers in 2 games against us is good D.

Outside wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:over the top? I was nice, I didn't even mention how much he turns the ball over and over and over, hes the fockin MVP and can't even guard other players at his position? Kyrie wanted him and played the best defense of his life on Steph, if he was a real player with any balls at all, he wouldn't let his coach always protect his pussy ass. Russell Weatbrook is one thing, I agree he needs protecting from that force, but Kyrie? come on man, Kyrie is 5'!!", that was pathetic. NOW I'm bashing....,,,, the system oriented star that is a product of the system, more than best player, no way is he best player in the league!!!! Hes not even best point in his conference, he should have figured out a way to feed Thompson or Green in that 4th and failed bigtime when one or two good old fashioned passes could have easily led to his team winning game 7.

cowens/oldschool wrote:if a player wants to take on the title/mantle of best player or best team ever, he better be thick skinned and have a game that backs that up and a really deep strong in depth game like say a Larry, Magic, Michael, etc. When his outside shot wasn't working Curry couldn't go to anything else, live by the 3 die by the 3.....all he needed was a simple get the ball in a good position to Klay or DG or anyone, but one bad play after another, his TO's killed any momentum his team was in process of picking up, KILLED it, airballs?? either he couldn't make a simple play or the defense was too good and the first player on him was Kyrie, who while playing outstanding defense for him is not exactly Avery Bradley or Marcus Smart either. He had a favorable match up and should have been able to do something, anything for his team if hes a real 2 time MVP with all these yada yada credentials. He got exposed, he is a great shooter, best player in the league.....thats a joke!!!!!

It was an interesting season, to say the least. One thing that became forcefully apparent, to me anyway, is the way many people form their attitudes toward elite sports stars. There are many people who dislike LeBron, for a variety of reasons -- the way he left Cleveland and Miami to form superfriends teams, the unprecedented control he has over the Cavs and the passive-aggressive way he exerts that control, his ball-dominant hero-ball style, and on it goes. The criticism mounted through game 4 of the finals, with everyone who hated him eager to label him a second-rate loser for getting to the finals so often but coming up short. The hate was strong. But after three all-time great performances by LeBron, the Cavs won the series, and the consensus is now that LeBron has moved firmly into the echelon of all-time greats.

Curry presented a different example. He was generally well-liked and popular, but the "get off my lawn" old-timers combined with the Warriors tremendous regular season spawned a backlash against the team in general and Curry in particular. After a less-than-dominant playoffs and coming up short against the Cavs, the criticism against the team and Curry has amped up hugely. The Warrior haters, and especially the Curry haters, are out in force.

The thing is, with less than a minute to go in game 7, the game was tied, 89-89. Whether LeBron is a five-time loser or an all-time great, whether the Warriors are back-to-back champs or the ultimate disappointment after going 73-9, and whether Curry is the leader of a repeat champion or exposed as a fraud, all that is decided by who makes the last shot? To make such a polarizing judgment of an eight-month season, two-year run, or 13-year career based on 57 seconds?

There's nothing logical about that, but that's because the people making black or white judgments, anointing someone as an all-time great or labeling them as trash, are making that choice based on emotion, not logic. If we use logic, the picture is filled with gray, not just black or white.

Through the first four games of the finals, LeBron was seriously subpar by his standards; he was averaging almost six turnovers per game, afraid to take a shot outside the paint, and alternated between being tentative and reverting to hero ball, for which both he and Kyrie were crucified in the media. He led his team to victory in these finals, but he was hugely disappointing in the 2011 finals against Dallas. His play was a huge reason why Miami won in 2012 and 2013, but his individual stardom was rendered irrelevant by superior team play in 2014 and 2015. A true assessment of him requires acknowledging both the good and bad, the times he has come up short as well as the times he's been a transcendent player.

It's the same with Curry. Just because he had a poor postseason doesn't invalidate his fantastic regular season. Others may see it differently, but having watched most of his games these past two seasons, it was obvious to me that he was physically limited in these playoffs. He played really well only three times -- before he got hurt in game 1 against Houston (24 points on 8-13 from the field, including 5-7 on threes, in less than 20 minutes), in his first game back against Portland, and in game 7 against OKC. He had a couple of other games where he was good but generally showed flashes of his MVP self on occasionally and was all too often a shadow of the player he was during the regular season.

Some may say that's because he choked on the big stage, but what I saw was a guy who was physically limited -- being an outstanding finisher at the rim during the season but missing even uncontested layups in the playoffs, able to make Kawhi Leonard look silly during the season but unable to shake Kevin Love one-on-one on the perimeter in the finals, giving up the ball when he had a favorable matchup on a switch when he normally feasts on that situation. At the start of the series, the Cavs double-teamed Curry and left other guys wide open under the basket, but by the end, he could barely get past anybody. Part of that is due to good defense by the Cavs, but he's seen tough, physical defense for quite a while now and thrived against it.

The Warriors have their title from last year, rightly earned, and their future remains bright. There is a narrative that this is the second poor finals for Curry, but that's false. Last year, he averaged 26.0 points, 5.2 rebounds, 6.3 assists, and 1.8 steals. He was especially productive and efficient in games 4-6, all Golden State wins. He was their MVP of the finals, even if the award went to Iguodala.

Curry did have a poor finals this year. He was well enough to play, so he has to take the criticism for his play. Some of it has nothing to do with any injury, such as his penchant for risky passes, such as the behind-the-back attempt at the end of game 7 (he does that way too much, and it drives me nuts, and that was a really poor decision). Their ultimate failure in a finals they should've won is a burden they must bear, Curry and Kerr in particular, but they can use this to make them stronger and better. Whether they will, time will tell. Magic Johnson was labeled a choker after the 1984 finals, but he used that experience to push himself and his team to greater heights.

In the meantime, the haters are having their day. I'm disappointed that Curry wasn't able to show what he can do on the biggest stage, but I don't understand this mindset of looking at this performance and thinking he "has no balls," calling him a "pussy ass," and saying he got "exposed." You can keep your black-or-white judgment and ignore the gray, but I've seen what this guy can do, and my money is on him.

steve may have got me in fighting mode and thrown me off with his comments as I was trying to be nice, if my words offended anyone I apologize.

I think the only family to be offended would be the Fockers.

worcester wrote:I think the only family to be offended would be the Fockers.

LOL

cowens/oldschool wrote:

bobheckler wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:

steve3344 wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:I don't have to tell you that Lebron led the Finals in every statistical category and it was first time that was ever done....when a point guard avg's more turnovers than assists, I'd say your in trouble.

I get it.  You hate Curry.  And that's fine.  

if a player wants to take on the title/mantle of best player or best team ever, he better be thick skinned and have a game that backs that up and a really deep strong in depth game like say a Larry, Magic, Michael, etc. When his outside shot wasn't working Curry couldn't go to anything else, live by the 3 die by the 3.....all he needed was a simple get the ball in a good position to Klay or DG or anyone, but one bad play after another, his TO's killed any momentum his team was in process of picking up, KILLED it, airballs?? either he couldn't make a simple play or the defense was too good and the first player on him was Kyrie, who while playing outstanding defense for him is not exactly Avery Bradley or Marcus Smart either. He had a favorable match up and should have been able to do something, anything for his team if hes a real 2 time MVP with all these yada yada credentials. He got exposed, he is a great shooter, best player in the league.....thats a joke!!!!!

Cowens,

First of all, nobody has said that Steph Curry wants to take on "the title/mantle of best player or best team ever".  That is a straw man.  He won the MVP the last two years because he was considered the MOST VALUABLE in those two years.  What did you think?  Did you think they'd say "well, you know, the league is so weak now, maybe we should give the MVP to 59 year-old Larry Bird because he deserves the title/mantle of one of the best players on one of the best teams ever"?

I looked up the games we played against GSW over those past 2 years.  4 games, total.


2014-2015

Steph Curry - 23.8ppg, 52.8% 2pt fg%, 44.3% 3pt fg%, 59.4% efg%, 7.7 apg, 3.1TOpg.  286 3pt fgm.
Avery Bradley - 13.9ppg, 42.9% fg%


In GSW
1/25/15 - 37.5% fg%, 45.4% 2pt fg%, 20% 3pt fg%, 11 assists, 3 TOs, 22 points.
Bradley 15 points, 31.3% fg%


In BOS
3/1/15 - 63.6% fg%, 56.2% 2pt fg%, 62.5% 3pt fg%, 5 assists, 5 TOs.  37 points.
Bradley 12 points, 29.4% fg%


2015-2016

Steph Curry - 30.1ppg, 56.6% 2pt fg%, 45.4% 3pt fg%, 63% efg%, 6.7 apg, 3.3TOpg.  402 3pt fgm.
Avery Bradley - 15.2ppg, 44.7%


In BOS
12/11/15 - 33% fg%, 21.4% 2pt fg%, 46.2% 3pt fg%, 11 rebs, 8 assists, 8 TOs.  38 points.
Bradley 19 points, 42% fg%

In GSW
4/1/16 - 47.4% fg%, 20% 2pt fg%, 57.1% 3pt fg%, 6 assists, 9 TOs.  29 points.
Bradley 15 points, 41.7% fg%


So, what do we have here?  We have him shooting under his normal fg% BUT we also have him averaging >29 points against us in 2014-15 (6 points over his average) and 33.5 points against us in 2015-16 (2.4 points more than his average).  In short, he scored more than his average in both of those MVP seasons.  We made him work for his points, but he got them and that was with Bradley on him.  He got more than his average with one of the top defensive guards in the league on him.  And you say he can't play when he's being pressured?

On the other side of the ball, Bradley had a good game, 19 points when he was averaging 15/game but no break outs.  


I'm not suggesting Bradley should have played even with Curry, of course not, but to say that Curry plays poorly against a good defender is a questionable statement UNLESS you think that Kyrie Irving is THAT much better a defender than Bradley.  Do you?


bob


.

bob you just confirmed that Avery Bradley's defense is very effective against Curry and we match up with them very well. In the game in Boston they won and Curry shot 9-27 from the field with 8 turnovers....I'll take that. In the game we stopped their home winning streak Curry had 9 turnovers....imagine if we had avg rim protection, not piss poor with Sully, KO and Z, so its not like AB had alot of help. 17 turnovers in 2 games against us is good D.

Cow,

So, we match up well against them, except for where we don't. Other than that we're ready to be World Champions, like they were.

Good point.


bob


.

right we just need a new frontline LOL...!!!

cowens/oldschool wrote:right we just need a new frontline LOL...!!!

Cow,

Bogut averaged <21mpg last year, 5.4ppg, 7rpg and 1.6 blocks.  Ezeli, who is quite raw, averaged <17mpg, 7ppg, 5.6rpg, 1.1 blocks.  Speights, a defender that makes Kelly look good, averaged <12mpg, 7.1ppg, 3.3rpg and .5 blocks.

Kelly averaged 20mpg, 4.1rpg and .5 blocks.  Zeller played 12mpg, 6.1ppg, 3rpg and .4 blocks.  Sully played <24mpg, 10.6ppg, 8.3rpg and .6 blocks.

Sully and Bogut both start and play about the same minutes (Sully maybe 10% more) and Sully significantly outrebounds Bogut, significantly out scores Bogut.  It's only on blocks that Bogut wins.  

Kelly is first big off the bench, as is Ezeli.  Kelly plays more minutes (about 15% more) but scores 50% more.  He doesn't rebound or block as well as Ezeli but then that's all they want from Ezeli.  He's just a pick setter for Thompson and Curry, and Kelly has a MUCH higher upside than Ezeli.   Ezeli will never be more than a 4th offensive option on any team he's on, while Kelly could be the 2nd, and a playmaker.  

Zeller plays about the same minutes as Speights.  Speights is a slightly better rebounder than Zeller, everything else is close.

Only Bogut, of GSW's 3 bigs, has a positive assist-to-TO ratio.  That means, other than Bogut, if you put the ball in their hands they are more likely to give it away than help the offense.  In our case, Zeller has a slightly negative assist-to-TO ratio, while Sully and Kelly have good, solid positive ones.

What frontline of theirs are you drooling over?  Their strength is NOT in their bigs, not even close, it's in their wings and it certainly isn't in the domination of our bigs.  They garner more blocks than us but are worse in just about every other category.  

Oh, btw, Bogut shot 48% from the line and Ezeli shot 56%.  That's Dwight Howard and Ben Wallace territory.  Speights shot 83%.  Only Sully, at 64%, was unacceptable.  Kelly and Zeller shot well into the mid-to-high 70%.  Sully is a career 72.4% shooter, last year sucked because he had that stupid new "look at me, I'm the new Sully!" shtick with his hair and his frito routine.

Bottom line, you do not want the ball in their front court's hands, except for Speights (and he doesn't defend).


And, as you pointed out, our front court is ok but not great.


bob


.

cowens/oldschool wrote:steve may have got me in fighting mode and thrown me off with his comments as I was trying to be nice, if my words offended anyone I apologize.

Nah, no offense taken. Your rants are representative of the Curry backlash that a LOT of people have expressed. I find it curious, baffling, and disappointing, but I also found the Warriors performance in games 5-7 curious, baffling, and disappointing, and I wasn't offended by them.

Being a Warrior and Curry fan, I just wanted to state a case for him while also making a few observations about the nature of how we view sports stars. If Curry is as good as I think he is, he'll be back. If not, then you'd be right that he was overhyped. His story is still in progress.

Bottom lines - Would we trade Kelly and Sully for Bogut and Ezeli? Hell no.
Would we trade Isaiah and Avery for Steph and Klay? Hell yes!
Would we trade Jae for Draymond? Hell yes.

Earlier I'd written that Steph was not injured. Wrong I was. He had an MCL sprain, for which he made NO excuses. He's a helluva player. No pussy there.

http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/2016/6/21/11980548/explain-one-playoffs-near-unkillable-warriors-almost-overcome-curry-s-injury-cavaliers-finals-2016

worcester wrote:Bottom lines - Would we trade Kelly and Sully for Bogut and Ezeli? Hell no.
Would we trade Isaiah and Avery for Steph and Klay? Hell yes!
Would we trade Jae for Draymond? Hell yes.

Earlier I'd written that Steph was not injured. Wrong I was. He had an MCL sprain, for which he made NO excuses. He's a helluva player. No pussy there.

http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/2016/6/21/11980548/explain-one-playoffs-near-unkillable-warriors-almost-overcome-curry-s-injury-cavaliers-finals-2016

worcester,

Well put. Concise and to the point. If you would not trade your first two bigs for their first two bigs, then your bigs are better.


bob


.

Let's change the name of the Trophy to the LeBron James MVP award after all Russell's 11 championships is insignificant compared to the great LeBron James

Dboss

worcester wrote:Bottom lines - Would we trade Kelly and Sully for Bogut and Ezeli? Hell no.
Would we trade Isaiah and Avery for Steph and Klay? Hell yes!
Would we trade Jae for Draymond? Hell yes.

Earlier I'd written that Steph was not injured. Wrong I was. He had an MCL sprain, for which he made NO excuses. He's a helluva player. No pussy there.

http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/2016/6/21/11980548/explain-one-playoffs-near-unkillable-warriors-almost-overcome-curry-s-injury-cavaliers-finals-2016

W -

Maybe not both Kelly and Sully where Bogut is involved, but I would deal either one of them straight up for Ezeli.  I wouldn't mind trying a frontcourt of Ezeli at C with either Kelly or Sully at PF.  I could see some complementary strengths with a Kelly Ezeli front court, a better fit than the patched-together Kelly Sully combo we sometimes tried.  Not Hall of Fame stuff, mind you, but I think a step up from where we are now.

Regards

dboss wrote:Let's change the name of the Trophy to the LeBron James MVP award after all Russell's 11 championships is insignificant compared to the great LeBron James

Dboss

Russell's 11 rings have justifiably earned him the fight to have the finals mvp trophy named after him. Why try to diminish James's accomplishments in the finals?

swish

bobheckler wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:right we just need a new frontline LOL...!!!

Cow,

Bogut averaged <21mpg last year, 5.4ppg, 7rpg and 1.6 blocks.  Ezeli, who is quite raw, averaged <17mpg, 7ppg, 5.6rpg, 1.1 blocks.  Speights, a defender that makes Kelly look good, averaged <12mpg, 7.1ppg, 3.3rpg and .5 blocks.

Kelly averaged 20mpg, 4.1rpg and .5 blocks.  Zeller played 12mpg, 6.1ppg, 3rpg and .4 blocks.  Sully played <24mpg, 10.6ppg, 8.3rpg and .6 blocks.

Sully and Bogut both start and play about the same minutes (Sully maybe 10% more) and Sully significantly outrebounds Bogut, significantly out scores Bogut.  It's only on blocks that Bogut wins.  

Kelly is first big off the bench, as is Ezeli.  Kelly plays more minutes (about 15% more) but scores 50% more.  He doesn't rebound or block as well as Ezeli but then that's all they want from Ezeli.  He's just a pick setter for Thompson and Curry, and Kelly has a MUCH higher upside than Ezeli.   Ezeli will never be more than a 4th offensive option on any team he's on, while Kelly could be the 2nd, and a playmaker.  

Zeller plays about the same minutes as Speights.  Speights is a slightly better rebounder than Zeller, everything else is close.

Only Bogut, of GSW's 3 bigs, has a positive assist-to-TO ratio.  That means, other than Bogut, if you put the ball in their hands they are more likely to give it away than help the offense.  In our case, Zeller has a slightly negative assist-to-TO ratio, while Sully and Kelly have good, solid positive ones.

What frontline of theirs are you drooling over?  Their strength is NOT in their bigs, not even close, it's in their wings and it certainly isn't in the domination of our bigs.  They garner more blocks than us but are worse in just about every other category.  

Oh, btw, Bogut shot 48% from the line and Ezeli shot 56%.  That's Dwight Howard and Ben Wallace territory.  Speights shot 83%.  Only Sully, at 64%, was unacceptable.  Kelly and Zeller shot well into the mid-to-high 70%.  Sully is a career 72.4% shooter, last year sucked because he had that stupid new "look at me, I'm the new Sully!" shtick with his hair and his frito routine.

Bottom line, you do not want the ball in their front court's hands, except for Speights (and he doesn't defend).


And, as you pointed out, our front court is ok but not great.


bob


.

their frontline can do more and better dirty work bob, isn't that obvious, with the 2 best shooters in the game on the same team they don't look to score alot? our bigs talent on offense doesn't make up how piss poor they are on defense. Why are we even having this discussion?