The 2017 NBA Playoffs: This Is A Recording

[rams80]

7 hours ago, DG_Now said:

LeBron joined a big three after watching the big three Celtics beat his ass for three years. He didn't join the Celtics. There's some important context there.

 

Apples and oranges since I doubt the Celtics had the cap space to afford him at the time.

[Wings]

True Story:

My Dad used to be a bus driver when my family lived in the Bay Area. In 1975 when the Warriors won the title he and another driver picked up the Warriors players, staff and family members in a couple of buses and brought them over to the Coliseum Arena for a celebration. As my Dad was trying to drive the bus into the arena it got wedged in the entrance. So the players, staff and family had to get off the bus and walk into the arena floor. They invited my Dad and the other driver to hang out with them at their little party inside the arena. Pretty cool. 

[OnWis97]

The Warriors are probably just like any other unsuccessful team that becomes successful.  Of course there are going to be bandwagon jumpers.  Any fanbase follows their teams more when they are competitive than when they are not.  Hell, I'm always a Twins fan, but I definitely went to more games in year 1 (when they were good) and year 2 (when I thought they'd be good) of Target Field than I have since...I still go to a few per year and am still a fan.  And if they become good in a few years I'll go to more games and so will other fans.  Does that make me a bandwagon fan?  I don't think so.  Will those other fans bringing the attendance numbers up be bandwagon fans?  Some will.  Just as is true just about anywhere else.

 

So from that perspective, the Warriors don't bug me. And it's also not their fault that jersey sales nationwide went up when they became what they are.  That's also how it works.  I don't see a lot of Suns gear in Minnesota.  And I do see Warriors and Cavs gear.  It's always been that way.  That's probably why there are more lifelong Laker fans around here than there are lifelong Nuggets fans.

 

I pretty much agree with this statement:

16 hours ago, McCarthy said:

My only gripe with them is Durant. He almost beat them last year, and yeah I get it - I'd also rather be rich in the Bay Area than be rich in Oklahoma, but from a competitor's standpoint how do you just go and join that machine when they're already a machine? It's just...weak. I don't know any other way to describe it. It'd be like if Ovechkin signed with the Penguins. Just lame. They won 73 games without him, won it all the year before that without him, and they did all of that with organic and smart moves. There was nothing hateable about the way they built the team. 

After Miami's Super Team and even with the Cavs striking so much lotto luck and signing the best player, it was refreshing to see a team become good without any headline-making moves.*  At the risk of being un-original, I just want to use the word "organic." It's how teams should be built.  

 

If I was a Golden State fan, I'd have loved 2014-2015.  I'd have enjoyed last year's run and, of course, been disappointed about the finals.  It would be easy to say that I'd actually be unhappy about Durant; that it would be more fun to go for another title without super-teaming it up.  But I cannot even put myself in their shoes (see: my non-cosmopolitan, bad weather market with a history of losing).  Part of me thinks it would be better to win three titles in eight years "organically" than seven titles in eight years thanks to this Durant signing.  But I can't really get upset with their fans for getting excited and enjoying it.  Most fans, particularly casual fans just like winning.  I'd be curious to know whether there are a lot of fans that say "yeah, this is fun, but I'd rather be doing it without a hired gun."

 

*though I wish it would not have happened since the two picks right before Curry were both point guards and both made by the Minnesota Timberwolves.  Ouch. 

[DG_ThenNowForever]

To be fair, no one likes the fan base of any team that's winning. If your team is winning, you only get to celebrate quietly or with other like minded folks. That's the trade-off.

 

The only exception is if your team is "long suffering." But that halo lasts about a day. Then your fanbase is a bunch of band wagoneering jerks. Again, the trade-off is that your team won a title.

[Rockstar Matt]

Yeah, look how quick it turned for the Warriors. In 2015, people were generally pleased to see them have success after 40 years of being mediocre at best. That honeymoon lasted all of three months when it became apparent that this is a historically great team and the bandwagoners began to get loud. I think Draymond being an utter a**clown didn't help either. And Durant taking the easy way out a year later. 

 

Having said that, you best believe that if this were one of my favorite teams, I would not give two s**ts about bandwagoners because, as DG mentioned, we're winning titles. And to be fair, the Warriors do play fun basketball. Great ball movement, high scoring and ridiculous 3's. 

 

 

[HedleyLamarr]

4 hours ago, OnWis97 said:

After Miami's Super Team and even with the Cavs striking so much lotto luck and signing the best player, it was refreshing to see a team become good without any headline-making moves.*  At the risk of being un-original, I just want to use the word "organic." It's how teams should be built.  

 

If I was a Golden State fan, I'd have loved 2014-2015.  I'd have enjoyed last year's run and, of course, been disappointed about the finals.  It would be easy to say that I'd actually be unhappy about Durant; that it would be more fun to go for another title without super-teaming it up.  But I cannot even put myself in their shoes (see: my non-cosmopolitan, bad weather market with a history of losing).  Part of me thinks it would be better to win three titles in eight years "organically" than seven titles in eight years thanks to this Durant signing.  But I can't really get upset with their fans for getting excited and enjoying it.  Most fans, particularly casual fans just like winning.  I'd be curious to know whether there are a lot of fans that say "yeah, this is fun, but I'd rather be doing it without a hired gun."

 

*though I wish it would not have happened since the two picks right before Curry were both point guards and both made by the Minnesota Timberwolves.  Ouch. 

That flag flies forever, brother.  I wouldn't care if my team spent a billion dollars for a season or the opponent in each of their games broke an arm or tore up their knee...give me a championship to celebrate.  Never seen the NFL rank their Super Bowl championships by degree of difficulty.

 

LeBron and the Miami SuperFriends made it acceptable in today's NBA that the best players team up to make winning a title easier instead of sticking with their original team and going that "organic" route.  LeBron made it acceptable that players conspire, years in advance of their free agency year, to gang up.  Durant and Golden State are merely following that lead.  Which means that anyone that says "What Durant did was worse" is either a LeBron fan or a fan that already hates Golden State.  It's easy...what's worse was the trendsetter and the fashion in which he made that choice public.

[Lights Out]

On 6/5/2017 at 6:14 PM, Bucfan56 said:

Seeing how pissed people like DG and LO get over this run actually makes it even more enjoyable.

Huh? I've made maybe three posts about "this run" and they were all after Game 2.

[FiddySicks]

Youve been hating on this Durant move from the minute it happened. 

[ozzyman314]

So if Cavs lose this series & Lebron goes to 3-5 in The Finals, is he still one of the GOAT players? or is he just an above average player that is elevated by a weak conference? 

Would he still be the Dominant player he is seen as if he played in The West and had to regularly face teams like Spurs, Dubs, & OKC? 

[Red Wolf]

22 minutes ago, ozzyman314 said:

So if Cavs lose this series & Lebron goes to 3-5 in The Finals, is he still one of the GOAT players? or is he just an above average player that is elevated by a weak conference? 

Would he still be the Dominant player he is seen as if he played in The West and had to regularly face teams like Spurs, Dubs, & OKC? 

This would be one of those preposterous questions along with whether or not the Earth is flat. 

[Rockstar Matt]

No he's one of the best to ever play. Top 5, easy. He's already cemented that. 

[HedleyLamarr]

5 hours ago, Red Wolf said:

This would be one of those preposterous questions along with whether or not the Earth is flat. 

Well, Kyrie Irving does play for Cleveland.....

[Sport]

7 hours ago, ozzyman314 said:

So if Cavs lose this series & Lebron goes to 3-5 in The Finals, is he still one of the GOAT players?

 

Yes, Skip Bayless.  

[rams80]

7 hours ago, ozzyman314 said:

So if Cavs lose this series & Lebron goes to 3-5 in The Finals, is he still one of the GOAT players? or is he just an above average player that is elevated by a weak conference? 

Would he still be the Dominant player he is seen as if he played in The West and had to regularly face teams like Spurs, Dubs, & OKC? 

 

The dude has taken a team to 7 straight NBA Finals, won an Olympic Gold Metal in that time frame, and is still the driving force of his team despite having at least one extra season's worth of mileage on him because of the 7 straight Finals runs.  He's a GOAT player and a freak of nature.

[OnWis97]

There will be a lot of people knocking LeBron down for being 3-5 in the finals and most likely retiring with only three titles.  We count rings.  That's how we rate 'em.  Circumstances don't matter.  Nobody's going to say "well, LeBron ran into an all-time dynasty in the Warriors."  Circumstances. Don't. Matter.  Particualry for LeBron, who we more want to knock down than build up.  Forget Jordan.  He's not going to be considered as good as the most beloved player since (including?) Jordan: Kobe.  Five rings for Kobe.  Three for LeBron. I personally think circumstances should matter (e.g., Hakeem's best teams came during Jordan's first retirement; Malone/Stockton's when the Bulls were unbeatable; does that make Hakeem better than Malone?)

 

I do find it funny when people say that being 3-0 in the finals is better than being 3-5.  Or (before #5 for Brady) Montana and Bradshaw at 4-0 was better than Brady at 4-2.  Again, there are a lot of circumstances, but just on record, I'd argue that 4-2 is better than 4-0.  Doesn't the "0" just imply a couple of earlier playoff losses? 

 

So at this point LeBron has five finals losses.  He probably should have won the two with Miami.  But the three with Cleveland?  That early one is one of the great all time individual efforts in getting a team somewhere and to hold that against him is silly.  The first Warriors loss was the first year of the juggernaut Warriors, his best teammates were injured and he kept it interesting (and I thought shoulda been MVP).  And this one...adding Durant to a 73-win team?  There were no "Golden State Warriors" for other stars to contend with.

 

Does this make me sound like a LeBron jock-sniffer?  Don't worry, there are plenty of Kobe and Jordan fan boys to offset me.  I'm really not, though I admit I am being contrarian; all the hate toward him has me cheering for him.

[ChicagoOakland]

19 hours ago, OnWis97 said:

I'd be curious to know whether there are a lot of fans that say "yeah, this is fun, but I'd rather be doing it without a hired gun."

I'm one of those fans.

 

For background, I grew up in Oakland and went to games all the time growing up when they were really, really terrible (the J-Rich/Antawn Jamison/Larry Hughes years), so I'm far from a bandwagoner.

 

With that said, I was so happy to see the Dubs win the championship in '15 because 1) it was hard to believe the team that was so historically terrible even got to the mountaintop (consider how crazy we all went during the "We Believe" year) and 2) the team from top to bottom was great and mostly homegrown.

When KD came on, it honestly changed the way I looked at the Warriors. No longer are they the team that came up and took the league by storm; now they're the team ganging up on other teams through sheer force. Not to mention the bandwagoners are only getting worse.

...long, I know, but that's my two cents worth.

[Lights Out]

19 minutes ago, OnWis97 said:

So at this point LeBron has five finals losses.  He probably should have won the two with Miami.

I'll give you 2011, but it's unfair to hold 2014 against him. The Spurs had a historic shooting performance that series and the better overall team. LeBron put up an efficient 28/7/4 despite being guarded by Kawhi most of the time. The Heat got very little from Wade (15/3/2) or Bosh (14/5) and pretty much nothing from the rest of the roster. There was nothing LeBron could have done to win that series. At the end of the day, it's still a team sport and the better team won.

[rams80]

4 minutes ago, Lights Out said:

I'll give you 2011, but it's unfair to hold 2014 against him. The Spurs had a historic shooting performance that series and the better overall team. LeBron put up an efficient 28/7/4 despite being guarded by Kawhi most of the time. The Heat got very little from Wade (15/3/2) or Bosh (14/5) and pretty much nothing from the rest of the roster. There was nothing LeBron could have done to win that series. At the end of the day, it's still a team sport and the better team won.

 

2014 is the biggest data point on why 7 straight finals is such an amazing accomplishment.  The rest of the Heat fell apart probably because of the added mileage from only 4 straight finals and LeBron has just kept going.

[CLEstones]

1 hour ago, rams80 said:

 

The dude has taken a team to 7 straight NBA Finals, won an Olympic Gold Metal in that time frame, and is still the driving force of his team despite having at least one extra season's worth of mileage on him because of the 7 straight Finals runs.  He's a GOAT player and a freak of nature.

 

He has over 200 career playoff games.  That's almost 3 extra seasons.

[ozzyman314]

being to "7 straight finals" is kind of my point. If he played in the West would he still have done that. The Big 3 Celtics are the only thing true challenge he's had. 

But put Lebron on a team in the West, does he still make 7 straight finals? If he has to go through Kobe's Lakers, Durant's OKC, The Spurs, & now The GSW? 

 

Lebron's a Hall of Famer, no doubt. But there's also no doubt that he plays in a weaker conference