Yikes - that was bad. Giving JR Smith a 4/57 contract is now looking, um, unwise. LeBron the GM has some work to do.
NBA Finals Gamethread or how the NBA has more downtime than Game Of Thrones
- Thread starter DeJesus Built My Hotrod
- Start date
The whole LeBron the GM thing is silly.
And really, what choice did they have? They were capped out, had no manner of replacing his minutes, and he had all the leverage.
And really, what choice did they have? They were capped out, had no manner of replacing his minutes, and he had all the leverage.
Given that they are already thinking about using Shumpert in his role, they clearly did have a choice. And giving 4 years to JR Smith is foolish no matter what your cap situation is.
When your argument is "they should have just given those minutes to Iman Shumpert" you're not making a good argument.
You could magically remove Smith from their books right now and it has no impact on their ability to add players of value. It's also, basically, only a 3 year deal. 4th year is non-guaranteed.
Don't know how I missed that story. I'm relenting a bit on my position. Certainly impacting him and completely understandable.
You are adding quotes to something I didn't say. I merely disagreed with your implied assertion that they had no other options. Shumpert is one, an albeit not very good one but you may want to take another look at JR's production this year. He was terrible but that admittedly could have been caused by outside forces.
Yeah, sorry, didn't mean to imply a direct quote. Just saying they had no other avenue to add a 2 guard, and Shumpert's not the answer.
No. If his off-court stuff has that much of an effect, then he shouldn't be playing. That's bush-league, and we shouldn't explain it away.
The rule changes make it impossible to compare eras. The Jordan Bulls played under the old illegal defense rules. This GSW team would crush the 96 Bulls playing under today's rules because the Bulls would have no spacing on offense. The Bulls started three non-shooters in Harper, Rodman, and Longley. You could never get away with that today because the Warriors would completely ignore those three, double- and triple-team Jordan, and dare the other guys to shoot. That kind of defense was illegal in 1996. On the other end, the Bulls' traditional centers (Longley and Wennington) would be unplayable against the Warriors, who would run them off the court.
OTOH, Kukoc would be a much more valuable player in today's game. The Bulls today would probably play Rodman at center in the Tristan Thompson role and start Kukoc at the 4. That would be a great defensive team with tons of athleticism and length 2 through 5 -- they could switch everything.
The PG position, however, would be a big problem. Harper would be much better defensively and allow them to switch 1-5 but wouldn't provide enough shooting to create any spacing (career .289 on 3s), which means you couldn't play him and Rodman together (you can maybe get way with having one non-shooter out there, but not two). The Warriors would play way off Harper to clog the line and dare Harper to make 3s. But if you sit Harper to get Kerr's shooting in the game, Kerr wouldn't be nearly athletic enough to hold up on defense. The Bulls would probably have Jordan guard Curry and try to hide Kerr on Thompson. But Kerr wasn't nearly fast enough to chase Thompson around off the ball, and he wouldn't have the length to challenge Thompson's shot. And if the Bulls are switching off the ball, eventually Kerr would be stuck on Curry or Durant (yikes!) or one of the Warriors's bigs, which would lead to an immediate PNR with Curry or Durant that couldn't be switched.
On the other end, Jordan would get his points, but the Warriors would have their army of rangy athletic wings (Thompson, Iguodala, Durant, Livingston) to throw at him and wear him down like they do with Lebron. Meanwhile, Green would nominally guard Rodman but mostly just ignore him and play free safety, ready to jump passing lanes and double team as needed. And Chicago wouldn't have enough shooting around Jordan to make the Warriors pay. Chicago would also have no depth (since all their bigs would be useless), and would run out of gas playing at the high pace the Warriors try to play.
I 100 percent agree the difference in era make comparing the two teams a fools errand. Particularly in the first two games of the Finals when we have seen the pace and space game taken to the literal extreme; I mean Cleveland took 100 shots last night. All the big numbers guys like Durant, Curry, LeBron and Love are putting up should be taken with a 1961-62 amount of salt. I think it's a lot different than Jordan averaging 40 points when it was common for playoff games to be played with both teams scoring under 90 points.
The 1996-97 Bulls maybe could have hung with GS.
Jordan
Pippen
Kerr
Harper
Kukoc
Rodman
Longley
That 7-man rotation. I'd go basically with Jordan, Pippen, Harper, Kukoc, and Rodman.
Jordan on Curry
Harper on Thompson
Pippen on Durant (or maybe Rodman on Durant and Pippen on Green)
Rodman on Green
Kukoc on Iguodala
Kerr on whomever is left I guess - that's not a good situation for Chi
If Zaza is in, you can go with Longley to match up with him, though I'm sure GS would have killed him on the P&R.
Those Bulls had 3 all-time great defenders in Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman, who could all defend players of ANY era, from like 6'3" guys all the way to guys 6'9".
Offensively, while GS clearly had better 3-point shooters, Chicago's shooters weren't bad.
Jordan - .374
Pippen - .368
Kerr - .464
Kukoc - .331
Harper - .362
Put that 5 on the floor and you have really good spacing offensively. You lose Rodman's defense, of course, so that's a problem when GS has the ball. Plus, who guards Jordan? I guess Durant with his length? Thompson (6'7") is actually taller than Jordan (6'6") was, or maybe you go with Draymond on Jordan, but I don't see either of those guys being able to handle MJ. Can't help off Kerr, given his 46% three point shooting. Harper was solid enough offensively and he could post up Curry if that was the matchup (Curry probably stayed with Kerr). Pippen would be a very tough matchup as well. Let's not get too caught up in the moment - Jordan and Pippen were both all-time great NBA players who were also ridiculously athletic. I love Klay but he's nowhere near the level of either of those guys; neither is Green.
So that would have been, if we had a time machine, an incredible game, but you guys are right - the rule differences really make today's basketball a different game altogether. Imagine if you could bump and ride players like you could in the heady days of the Bulls and Pistons? I think that would give Durant and Curry major problems.
Fun thought experiment anyway.
Jordan
Pippen
Kerr
Harper
Kukoc
Rodman
Longley
That 7-man rotation. I'd go basically with Jordan, Pippen, Harper, Kukoc, and Rodman.
Jordan on Curry
Harper on Thompson
Pippen on Durant (or maybe Rodman on Durant and Pippen on Green)
Rodman on Green
Kukoc on Iguodala
Kerr on whomever is left I guess - that's not a good situation for Chi
If Zaza is in, you can go with Longley to match up with him, though I'm sure GS would have killed him on the P&R.
Those Bulls had 3 all-time great defenders in Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman, who could all defend players of ANY era, from like 6'3" guys all the way to guys 6'9".
Offensively, while GS clearly had better 3-point shooters, Chicago's shooters weren't bad.
Jordan - .374
Pippen - .368
Kerr - .464
Kukoc - .331
Harper - .362
Put that 5 on the floor and you have really good spacing offensively. You lose Rodman's defense, of course, so that's a problem when GS has the ball. Plus, who guards Jordan? I guess Durant with his length? Thompson (6'7") is actually taller than Jordan (6'6") was, or maybe you go with Draymond on Jordan, but I don't see either of those guys being able to handle MJ. Can't help off Kerr, given his 46% three point shooting. Harper was solid enough offensively and he could post up Curry if that was the matchup (Curry probably stayed with Kerr). Pippen would be a very tough matchup as well. Let's not get too caught up in the moment - Jordan and Pippen were both all-time great NBA players who were also ridiculously athletic. I love Klay but he's nowhere near the level of either of those guys; neither is Green.
So that would have been, if we had a time machine, an incredible game, but you guys are right - the rule differences really make today's basketball a different game altogether. Imagine if you could bump and ride players like you could in the heady days of the Bulls and Pistons? I think that would give Durant and Curry major problems.
Fun thought experiment anyway.
I think the problem with the small-ball lineups for Chicago is they don't have enough defense to stop penetration, and they also have zero rim protection.
Totally agree on the complexity of comparing across eras---but still think it's a fun discussion. Probably worth it's own thread.
Totally agree on the complexity of comparing across eras---but still think it's a fun discussion. Probably worth it's own thread.
The Ws would get killed by the Bulls and by that I mean literally mugged and physically beat up. Remember, there was no pace and space game in the Bulls' era because people were getting hit everytime they crossed the paint like a LB chucking a TE. Also, combined with the hand-checking, it was much harder to run the pick 'n' roll because players were literally being prevented from moving.
The '86-87 Lakers team could have matched up and run with GS. Scott, Magic, Kareem, Worthy, Green, Mychal Thompson, Cooper, and Rambis were even longer than GSW and just as athletic. I mean yes GSW has three of the 15 best players in the league, but those Lakers had 2 of the top 10 players of all time and James Worthy.
Plus, it would be fun to see Mychal guard his son.
2007-08 Celtics vs. this year's Warriors?
Rondo, RAllen, TAllen, Pierce, Garnett
vs
Curry, Klay, Iguodala, Durant, Green
Rondo obviously isn't nearly as good offensively but at his best he was a great distributor, pace-setter, and defender, and was long enough to give Curry problems.
Durant with more mobility, but KG has the length to disrupt him. Obviously an all-time great player, KG was also a premier rim protector.
Ray and Klay would have been a terrific matchup.
Pierce and Green were similarly sized and athletic.
Tony Allen that year was at least a semi-competent 3 point shooter (.316) and obviously a phenomenal defender. That C's team had three premier defenders in T Allen, Rondo, and Garnett. And plenty of offensive firepower in Ray, Pierce, and Garnett. Could go big bringing in Kendrick, or small if they wanted to.
C's could also bring Posey and House off the bench for more scoring if they wanted to.
Rondo, RAllen, TAllen, Pierce, Garnett
vs
Curry, Klay, Iguodala, Durant, Green
Rondo obviously isn't nearly as good offensively but at his best he was a great distributor, pace-setter, and defender, and was long enough to give Curry problems.
Durant with more mobility, but KG has the length to disrupt him. Obviously an all-time great player, KG was also a premier rim protector.
Ray and Klay would have been a terrific matchup.
Pierce and Green were similarly sized and athletic.
Tony Allen that year was at least a semi-competent 3 point shooter (.316) and obviously a phenomenal defender. That C's team had three premier defenders in T Allen, Rondo, and Garnett. And plenty of offensive firepower in Ray, Pierce, and Garnett. Could go big bringing in Kendrick, or small if they wanted to.
C's could also bring Posey and House off the bench for more scoring if they wanted to.
Celtics get smoked.
Tony Allen was only playing 5 minutes a game in 2007-2008 playoffs. Ans as awesome as Garnett is, you don't want him chasing Durant around all across the court.
Tony Allen was only playing 5 minutes a game in 2007-2008 playoffs. Ans as awesome as Garnett is, you don't want him chasing Durant around all across the court.
You may be right. I just find it hard to see a team with 3 hall of famers, a really good coach, an all-star point guard, and good bench talent getting smoked by anyone. But yeah, I guess it's totally possible.
Garnett could also play Green instead. KD is a matchup nightmare for anyone, obviously.
Garnett could also play Green instead. KD is a matchup nightmare for anyone, obviously.
What about a healthy 2016-17 Spurs team?
Or a 2016-17 Cavs team in Cleveland?
I think the Warriors lose games to both of these squads.
Or a 2016-17 Cavs team in Cleveland?
I think the Warriors lose games to both of these squads.
Perhaps.
But, strangely, GSW has performed better on the road while the Cavs have performed worse at home - both during the regular season and the playoffs. I'm saying this purely from an outcome perspective - both Win % and PF vs. PA. Perhaps someone who's looked at more advanced stats will come in here and tell me why I'm wrong.
Edit: Anecdotally, we Celts fans have very recent exposure to this phenomenon on the Cavs side.
Last edited:
ESPN writer :
Mike WiseVerified account @MikeWiseguy 17h17 hours ago
Cavs locker room has a strong reefer aroma to it tonight. Hey, it's Cali. You're down 2-0 and it's all about pain control. #NBAFinals
158 replies 1,771 retweets 1,790 likes
Mike WiseVerified account @MikeWiseguy 17h17 hours ago
Cavs locker room has a strong reefer aroma to it tonight. Hey, it's Cali. You're down 2-0 and it's all about pain control. #NBAFinals
158 replies 1,771 retweets 1,790 likes
That Celtics lineup with Allen and Rondo would not have had nearly enough spacing/shooting to be able to score against the Warriors. You just can't play three guys without 3-point range anymore. When the Warriors played Memphis in 2015 Tony Allen played great defense in the first three games and then got benched because the Warriors just started completely ignoring him on offense. They had Andrew Bogut "guard" him by standing 20 feet away and playing help defense on everyone else. Allen missed three wide-open shots in the first quarter and he was done.
The 2008 Celtics wouldn't have had enough shooting in any of their lineups against the Warriors. Rondo being a poor outside shooter would mean that they couldn't play non-shooting bigs. Perkins , Allen, Davis, and Powe all wouldn't be able to play. Posey would have to play 35-40 minutes. Eddie House would get a run, but there's nowhere to hide him on defense. They'd basically be playing six guys. While they wouldn't shut down the Warriors, I think they'd do okay on D, but they'd really struggle to score. Allen's run-around-screens game wouldn't work because the Warriors would switch everything off the ball. Garnett and Pierce would end up taking a lot of contested 17-foot jump shots, and while they'd make some of those you're not going to beat the Warriors by shooting mid-range jumpers.
The 2008 Celtics wouldn't have had enough shooting in any of their lineups against the Warriors. Rondo being a poor outside shooter would mean that they couldn't play non-shooting bigs. Perkins , Allen, Davis, and Powe all wouldn't be able to play. Posey would have to play 35-40 minutes. Eddie House would get a run, but there's nowhere to hide him on defense. They'd basically be playing six guys. While they wouldn't shut down the Warriors, I think they'd do okay on D, but they'd really struggle to score. Allen's run-around-screens game wouldn't work because the Warriors would switch everything off the ball. Garnett and Pierce would end up taking a lot of contested 17-foot jump shots, and while they'd make some of those you're not going to beat the Warriors by shooting mid-range jumpers.
It's beyond bad, it's blatant intent to injure.
How anyone can route for Cleveland is beyond my comprehension, that's just piss poor right there.
Watching this series so far gives me a good view of what it must have looked like as Germany rolled into France in 1940; going up against a worthy opponent but just kicking their asses.
This would be an interesting clash of styles---that Celtics D was better than anyone GS has faced, and it's hard to be sure what impact it would have had. I tend to think GS would win because of the offensive issues you note, but style-wise that's a better (or at least more interesting to imagine) matchup than any of the other teams mentioned (even though I don't think, in the abstract, this Celtics team is quite at level of some of the others). People often think you have to beat the Warriors by matching their skill players with similar guys and that isn't how Cleveland did it last year, or how I'd expect Celts to approach it.
I think Tony Allen would actually play a lot, just generally with Garnett at the 5 (for spacing). Marcus Smart played 24 minutes in each of the games this year vs GS, and he's no worse and probably slightly better shooter than marcus. Granted, Stevens is also a better coach than Doc but I think Doc would get that elite perimeter defense is worth the price at the other end vs GS.
I like it; maybe Tristian "MAS-36 rifle" Thompson..........never been fired, only dropped once.
2016 NBA finals, game 1/2: Golden State was +48
2017 NBA finals, game 1/2: Golden State was +41
Which Golden State team do you think is better, last years that was +48 or this years that is +41?
Understood, just curious as to which team you thought was better. Is Cleveland better or worse than they were last year?
I'm not a big basketball fan, casual at best. From what I saw in the Eastern Conference playoffs, Cleveland is clearly the class of the conference, dominant really. Golden State is on an entirely different level than them.
Not sure if that bodes well for the overall health of the sport.
Cleveland is better this year. Golden State is comically better. They basically traded Harrison Barnes for Kevin Durant. Talk about replacement value versus the elite.
And Golden State is also much healthier and significantly more rested than they were last year. Winning those 73 games(and the seven game series against OKC) really took a toll. There has been no toll this year. Golden State must be laughing at how rested they are.
After 2 games the ratings are the best since Jordan's last finals. People like super teams.
And yet LBJ looked exhausted. I thought the whole reason they didn't go hard during all 82 games was so he'd be rested now.
Fortunately for the NBA, basketball is a sport that is very rarely "over" after 75%, the way a 28-3 football game, or a 5-1 hockey game, or a 10-1 baseball game is.
I refuse to believe "many" people were watching the last 3-4 minutes of game 2 though.
Depends on precisely when you measure the ratings.
Who knows how much energy Lebron is expending each game, but you have to figure it's significantly higher than any GS player has to put forth.
They played LBJ an excessive number of minutes this year in my opinion. For example, they gave him games 81 and 82 off, but prior to that in games 78, 79, and 80 he played 38:30, 41:25, then 46:50 respectively. I'm sure all the rest in the playoffs counteracts that, but it seemed odd at the time.
Edit: Overall he only played ~90 more minutes this regular season than last year, so my narrative doesn't really hold up compared to last year.
Minutes Played
2012-13 2877
2013-14 2902
2014-15 2493
2015-16 2709
2016-17 2794
Edit: Overall he only played ~90 more minutes this regular season than last year, so my narrative doesn't really hold up compared to last year.
Minutes Played
2012-13 2877
2013-14 2902
2014-15 2493
2015-16 2709
2016-17 2794
Last edited:
Yep. And even beyond that they upgraded, remarkably.
• Zaza (currently the #4 C in the league by RPM) is better than Bogut when you factor in availability (worse interior defender, better at hedging/recovering, equally great at screening, and a much better FT shooter)
• McGee is much better than last year's banged-up Ezeli
• David West is much better than Speights, especially as a passer and defender.
• Ian Clark is better than Barbosa (he didn't replace him per se, as he was with the team last season, but he effectively took LB's rotation minutes).
• Pat McCaw is better than Brandon Rush
• McAdoo and Looney both improved, and no one on the team significantly declined (unless you count Steph Curry)
• Matt Barnes is a hundred times better than Varejao (I'd go so far as to say Matt Barnes even at his advanced age is roughly the same caliber of player as HB — similar positional versatility, worse shooter/scorer, better at everything else).
Those changes were supposed to be the "cost" of the upgrade from HB to KFD. Far from gutting the team's bench depth, Bob Freaking Myers actually improved it, which I think is one of the reasons the team as a whole has been so fresh for the playoffs (that plus the 20-game rest KD got due to injury, and the 7-8 days of rest they got between series by sweeping all of them).
Everyone the Warriors has played under 35 minutes a game — both in the regular season and in the playoffs. Meanwhile, 32 year-old LeBron played 37.8 mpg in the regular season and has played 40.8 in the playoffs.
They were trying to lock up the 1 seed and still have time to rest everyone, unfortunately they blew a 26 pt 4th quarter lead in game 79 and lost game 80 to the hawks bench before finally deciding to just shut it down and take the 2 seed
Which was clearly misguided because, as the playoffs showed, they could have basically swept the East without playing a single home game if they were forced to do so. LeBron being healthy should always be consideration #1 to that team unless the Celtics magically become competitive in the next year or two and home court actually matters.
He played more MPG but took a lot of nights off which reduced his overall workload. I'm guessing that whoever handles their sports science division thinks having extended rest is more important than reducing in-game minutes. On the whole Cleveland has played him far fewer minutes than Miami did. Part of that might be his advancing age, but it definitely seems like a shift in the way they approach his rest.
An interesting note re: health/rest...
Kerr took a fair amount of heat at the time for this March 11 game in San Antonio, in which, based on the advice of team medical staff, he decided to sit EVERYONE. The team had played a tight game the day before in Minnesota; had arrived in SA at 4:00 am; and was at the end of a brutal stretch of schedule that saw them criss-cross the country multiple times. Kerr and staff deemed it a high-risk game for injury, as well as their only chance to buy the core guys a solid three-day stretch of rest for the late-season and playoff push.
So: no Curry, no Green, no Thompson, no Iguodala, and no KD (who was still recovering from his Grade 2 MCL sprain). Ian Clark, Pat McCaw and Matt Barnes led the team in minutes, the Spurs romped by 22, and the Ws dropped their 5th of 7 games, and fell to 52-14, just 0.5 games ahead of the Spurs for the #1 seed.
Since that game three months ago, the Warriors are now **29-1** — and the one loss was effectively a forfeit (Game #81 v. Utah, in which the Ws had already clinched everything, Klay was a healthy scratch, and no starters left the bench in a tight game in the 4th quarter.)
Kerr took a fair amount of heat at the time for this March 11 game in San Antonio, in which, based on the advice of team medical staff, he decided to sit EVERYONE. The team had played a tight game the day before in Minnesota; had arrived in SA at 4:00 am; and was at the end of a brutal stretch of schedule that saw them criss-cross the country multiple times. Kerr and staff deemed it a high-risk game for injury, as well as their only chance to buy the core guys a solid three-day stretch of rest for the late-season and playoff push.
So: no Curry, no Green, no Thompson, no Iguodala, and no KD (who was still recovering from his Grade 2 MCL sprain). Ian Clark, Pat McCaw and Matt Barnes led the team in minutes, the Spurs romped by 22, and the Ws dropped their 5th of 7 games, and fell to 52-14, just 0.5 games ahead of the Spurs for the #1 seed.
Since that game three months ago, the Warriors are now **29-1** — and the one loss was effectively a forfeit (Game #81 v. Utah, in which the Ws had already clinched everything, Klay was a healthy scratch, and no starters left the bench in a tight game in the 4th quarter.)
Of course, but it's not like the Cavs didn't know that was going to happen coming in.
I guess my point is that he's gonna take a lot of nights off next season
He signed a three-year contract last summer so unless the Cavs decide they want to trade him he's stuck. I can't think of another team with adequate cap space that would be a better fit anyways. Cleveland is really good, they just aren't historically good like this year's Warriors team.
Just to play along.
James opts out, Celts clear enough space to sign him, then trade Bradley + Crowder + 2018 pick for Paul George.
Go to battle against GS with IT, Brown, George, LeBron, Horford and a bench of Fultz, Brown, Zizic, and some ring chasing vets
James opts out, Celts clear enough space to sign him, then trade Bradley + Crowder + 2018 pick for Paul George.
Go to battle against GS with IT, Brown, George, LeBron, Horford and a bench of Fultz, Brown, Zizic, and some ring chasing vets
Well you know James Jones will be on the team.Just to play along.
James opts out, Celts clear enough space to sign him, then trade Bradley + Crowder + 2018 pick for Paul George.
Go to battle against GS with IT, Brown, George, LeBron, Horford and a bench of Fultz, Brown, Zizic, and some ring chasing vets
Just to play along.
James opts out, Celts clear enough space to sign him, then trade Bradley + Crowder + 2018 pick for Paul George.
Go to battle against GS with IT, Brown, George, LeBron, Horford and a bench of Fultz, Brown, Zizic, and some ring chasing vets
Makes no sense. Great players are measured by rings and if it's James 3, Curry 2 after this series the logical landing spot for LeBron is Golden State.