2017 NBA Finals: Warriors vs. Cavs part 3

the only chance the cavs have to win a game is for at least 3 members to have insane games. lebron played huge last night and they didnt even have a slight chance to win. granted kyrie was total shit. its clear just how mismatched the teams are right now. its not a surprise, the minute they signed durant everyone knew (or should have) exactly how this season was going to end.

Lebrons own damn doing. He made it cool to join other super stars in their prime and now he's facing his own creation. Serves him just right.

Won't ever understand legit stars teaming up with other legit in their prime stars via free agency. Bunch of bitches these millenials. From Lebron to Dwight to Durant.

Stay strong Brodie, stay strong.

Lebrons own damn doing. He made it cool to join other super stars in their prime and now he's facing his own creation. Serves him just right.

Won't ever understand legit stars teaming up with other legit in their prime stars via free agency. Bunch of bitches these millenials. From Lebron to Dwight to Durant.

Stay strong Brodie, stay strong.

This is nothing new - Charles Barkley did it, and he's no millenial. Yet he had the nerve to run his mouth about LeBron.

Lebrons own damn doing. He made it cool to join other super stars in their prime and now he's facing his own creation. Serves him just right.

Won't ever understand legit stars teaming up with other legit in their prime stars via free agency. Bunch of bitches these millenials. From Lebron to Dwight to Durant.

Stay strong Brodie, stay strong.

This is nothing new - Charles Barkley did it, and he's no millenial. Yet he had the nerve to run his mouth about LeBron.

Barkley was 32 and out of his prime, Olajuwon and Drexler were also out of primes.

Lebrons own damn doing. He made it cool to join other super stars in their prime and now he's facing his own creation. Serves him just right.

i never even thought about that. he created this mentality. i remember people tried to justify what lebron did with miami by talking about the celtics big 3 even though those 2 situation were nothing alike. people see to lack the understanding of trades vs free agency and prime vs past prime but whatever. i will say though that before KD i gave credit to the warriors for building that team while the miami situation was just a shit show from the start

The Wolves wanted KG out of Minnesota, and they traded him to the Celtics for SEVEN players (Including 20 and 10 Al Jefferson).

Entirely different scenerio.

The Wolves wanted KG out of Minnesota, and they traded him to the Celtics for SEVEN players (Including 20 and 10 Al Jefferson).

Entirely different scenerio.

i am glad someone can see the difference. i had to argue with so many people over this bullshit

But going Miami was a very good decision, it clearly turned out to be. Dan Gilbert fucked it up and there was no fix and ways to add better guys to help out LBJ. It's no secret that all championship teams were stacked outside of very few (like 3 or 4 teams) instances. Staying with Cavs would have been a pretty bad decision if you ask me.

That said, I don't think this year's Cavs are better than LBJ's Heat. Outside of Love, everyone's inferior. Bosh isn't far too worse than Love anyways otherwise for rebounding. Moderately aged Wade tops prime overrated Irving. Battier is better defender than anyone on Cavs. Ray is better than wash Deron Williams, then you have Rio Chalmers who was erratic but more skillful than Shumpert ever was. Chris Andersen/Udonis were somewhat nice tough bodies.

Would you guys hate CP3 going to the Spurs btw?

This is nothing new - Charles Barkley did it, and he's no millenial. Yet he had the nerve to run his mouth about LeBron.

Like others mentioned; it wasn't the same. That was some unprecedented shit right there. That's like Stockton and Malone in their prime joining Ewing so they could dominate the East by winning not one, not two, not three...

Durant is another bitch. That's MJ bolting to the Bad boy Pistons because the Bulls couldn't get passed them for the longest while.

Of course there have been "super teams" but have they really been a) in their primes, b) collectively teamed up willingly via free agency, c) been top 5 at their position while doing so? I don't recall any team like that.

Obviously people will point out Payton and Malone to LA as an example but those guys were old as balls.

Lebron knew what he was doing when he joined Bosh and Wade. Dude thought (and rightfully so) he would dominate the east and win a bunch of rings on easy mode.

Well he can get fucked now since Golden State is doing just that and he's left with a maxed out Tristan Thompson and the corpse of former awesome players looking to hitch a ride for a ring. Dude created his own team down in Cleveland and suddenly he "needs more help?" Stupid FB and Reddit people can get fucked. The team has the highest payroll in the league and Lebron the GM basically put that team together. Then Dan Gilbert wasn't worried about parity or what it's like for the league.

But going Miami was a very good decision, it clearly turned out to be. Dan Gilbert fucked it up and there was no fix and ways to add better guys to help out LBJ. It's no secret that all championship teams were stacked outside of very few (like 3 or 4 teams) instances. Staying with Cavs would have been a pretty bad decision if you ask me.

That said, I don't think this year's Cavs are better than LBJ's Heat. Outside of Love, everyone's inferior. Bosh isn't far too worse than Love anyways otherwise for rebounding. Moderately aged Wade tops prime overrated Irving. Battier is better defender than anyone on Cavs. Ray is better than wash Deron Williams, then you have Rio Chalmers who was erratic but more skillful than Shumpert ever was. Chris Andersen/Udonis were somewhat nice tough bodies.

Would you guys hate CP3 going to the Spurs btw?

Chris Paul is 32 (wrong side of his prime), and the Spurs are not a super team. Tony Parker may not even play next year (He said he would come back better than ever.... in 2018), and Ginobili is done. Lamarcus Aldridge will be 32 when next season starts. In my opinion, that would not be forming a super team. I think that team would be great (Like all Spurs teams are under Pop, 50 or 60 wins no matter what), but again, it's a different scenario. He would be joining a young Leonard, but a past his prime Aldridge (and himself, past his prime).

In regards to the differences between "super teams".

Only people who don't know a lot about basketball or it's history would compare Barkley going to the Rockets. Barkley, Drexler and Olajuwon all turned 33 in the 96-97 season when they joined. All outside of primes. It's not even close to the same thing. Also, Drexler to Houston was a trade (Involving Otis Thorpe, who was loved in Houston), and when Barkley joined the Rockets, it was via Trade as well (Barkley was traded for Sam Cassell, Robert Horry, Chucky Brown and Mark Bryant.) Comparing "The Decision", where 2 players in apex primes joined another player in his prime via free agency, to put on a WWE style presentation with "WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOS!!!!" and "Not one, not two, not three, not four" etc is a really, really bad comparison. It's not even close to the same thing.

And in regards to KG, he loved Minnesota, and wanted to stay. KG is as loyal as they come. He was pushed out, and the Wolves received 7 players for him (again, Big Al who was a 20 and 10 guy). If Garnett hadn't been pushed out, I believe he would still have been in Minnesota being the alpha there. Ray Allen was ALSO traded to the Celtics, so not via free agency. He was traded for Delonte West, Wally Szczerbiak and the fifth overall pick (Who ended up being Jeff Green). Again, two trades that brought KG and Allen to Boston, completely different.

Bringing up the Celtics of the 80's is laughable as well. Kevin McHale was DRAFTED by the Celtics, and grew with the team. Parish put up solid numbers with Golden State, but he wasn't an all star, and he was also part of a draft day TRADE to Boston in 1980 (The same year they drafted Kevin McHale). Those 3 grew together, and were great. That "Super Team" of Celtics came together entirely different. It's just like Magic/Kareem/Worthy, Magic was drafted by the Lakers who already had Kareem (who was 33 at the time, btw), and later the Lakers drafted Worthy. So Magic and Worthy both grew into who they were with the team, from the start. How in the world can anybody compare what is happening now in the NBA with Free Agents to any of this? You can't.

With Pippen, he was traded for on draft day by the Bulls, and Horace Grant was drafted by the Bulls, and they grew along with Jordan together to form the Bulls first 3 championships. That was far from a stacked team, they used what they had (of course, having the greatest player of all time, Jordan) and won 3 titles in a really tough league. When Rodman Joined, it's because he was unhappy with the Spurs, and Robinson and him didn't mesh, he was also TRADED to Chicago. So Pippen was homegrown from the draft, and Rodman was traded to Chicago, how is that similar in anyway? Again, you can't compare.

The people who compare the situations don't know what they are talking about.

That's why I respected last year's warriors because they got steph Thompson Barnes and Green through the draft but Durant is still a bitch

One other problem is that super teams usually are exciting but neither of super teams in this era are the Lakers or Celtics. That negates from fun factor for a lot of fans imo hence the more whining about both finalists. Also having seen LBJ for so many times, you know what's in the box already.

It's worth it to note that most of championship dynasty teams had at least a couple of Hall of Famers. There were like 4 teams that didn't but none repeated, aka one hit wonder though a remarkable achievement. I don't know if both Love and Irving qualify as HOF. How many HOF caliber players do you guy think the Warriors have? I think they already have two, of 1st ballot Famers is in prime.

Andrew,
You wonder why GSW won so many games cuz they had one bad stretch?

I agree the bulls never faced a team like GSW. Is there a team comparable to these warriors?? Maybe some come close on offense but not on defense

Bulls were mostly homegrown first and 2nd 3peat. It was more about finding players to compliment the core. Adding Cartwright via trade was an instrumental move. There were smaller moves but important ones like signing levingston, bison dele, Kerr, Harper, trade for randy brown during the reign

Andrew,
You wonder why GSW won so many games cuz they had one bad stretch?

I agree the bulls never faced a team like GSW. Is there a team comparable to these warriors?? Maybe some come close on offense but not on defense

Bulls were mostly homegrown first and 2nd 3peat. It was more about finding players to compliment the core. Adding Cartwright via trade was an instrumental move. There were smaller moves but important ones like signing levingston, bison dele, Kerr, Harper, trade for randy brown during the reign

If we go by the old rules on 'D', I'll take the 96 Bulls over this year's Warriors in a 7-game series.

How about the other great teams of the past.....67 Sixers, 72 Lakers, 83 Sixers, 86 Celtics, 87 Lakers? Would the Bad Boy Pistons have a chance?

In my opinion, I take the 95-96 Bulls over them. For the reason that Pippen could stick to Durant (Not shut him down, but contain him), and Jordan would still be the best player by far on the floor. I think defensively Jordan could lock up Klay, and if on Curry could do a great job. Ron Harper was a fantastic defender in his day (Even with the Bulls), I think Curry and Thompson being defended by Jordan and Harper would limit the impact a lot.

Also, Luc Longley was supremely underrated, have you ever actually watched Longley play with the Bulls? He was so solid. The Bulls win at the Center position, and Rodman makes Draymond Green irrelevant on offense (and knocks him off the glass, because he was a far superior rebounder).

I think the 83 Sixers would give them fits, almost exclusively because of Moses Malone. Moses was in his prime, and nobody in todays NBA could keep him off the boards, and he was also a 30 a game scorer and good shot blocker. Moses would have demanded double teams. However, the 82-83 76ers lacked outside shooting, so most of the damage would have been caused by a slashing Dr. J, or the mid range attack of Dr. J, Andrew Toney and Maurice Cheeks. Iavaroni when on the floor would be exposed. But, Cheeks was an elite defender in his day, however... while sticking to Curry, who would cover Klay? Andrew Toney might have some issues. I think that series would be tough... I may have to take the Warriors though.....

I think the 86 Celtics pull out the Series, because they have the superior front line to GS, along with a good defensive backcourt with Dennis Johnson and Ainge. However, with the Celtics weak bench, depth would worry me a tad, with GS being a such a run n gun, fastbreak squad. But, so were the Lakers in the 80's, and the Celtics hung just fine. I don't see GS having an answer for Parish, McHale and Bird. I think Draymond Green would be ripped apart down low trying to guard the long/lanky McHale, he gave legends fits in the post, I am sure he would do just fine on Green.

I also give the nod to the 87 Lakers, based on the fact that not only could they keep up with GS, they had a older, yet still skilled Kareem, who had the most unstoppable move in the history of the sport (Sky Hook). Size wise, the Lakers would be perfectly fine, and having a 6'9" PG who was a good post player would give GS fits. Trying to picture Curry guarding Magic, or Zaza guarding Kareem, is pretty funny. I think Worthy was a solid defender who could cover Durant, but I believe Durant would probably still get his. I just think Johnson>Curry and Kareem>any big guy on GS, wins out. So I go with 87 Lakers.

I think the Bad Boy Pistons and GS might be the most fun matchup. Seeing Rodman and Green go at it, along with Thomas and Curry (Thomas was an elite defender), what a fun matchup this would be. I think that Bill Laimbeer stretches the floor for Detroit, forcing McGee and Zaza out of the paint to guard him, which in my opinion could cause potential issues for GS. However, even physical, it would be tough for them to do anything about Durant, UNLESS they put Rodman on him (Which I think would be a possibility, as Rodman had quick feet especially at that age, and would just harass Durant all game). Rodmans motor was so high, that would be fun to watch. I think Dumars and Klay may cancel eachother out (both good defenders, guarding eachother making it tough). I think I'm 50-50 on this matchup.

67 Sixers and 72 Lakers is tough, because we are going WAY back at that point. I think that the 72 Lakers could pull out the series, because Chamberlain would eat GS for breakfast/lunch/dinner. Chamberlain. even at that age, would roast any big guy on the current GS roster. The Lakers in 72 also had West, who was the alpha on that team at that point. I personally think that the Lakers shooting was good enough, so if Chamberlain ended up being doubled, he would kick it out to capable shooters. Jerry West was such a shot maker, GS would probably place Klay on him, I'm not sure it would make much of a difference, just like I don't think the 72 Lakers could really handle Durant. The Lakers also had Happy Hairston, who was a phenomenal rebounder, and a capable scorer. I see Curry having a good series in this one...

A team not talked about that I think would beat this team, is the 94-95 Houston Rockets. GS would have no answer for Olajuwon, and Olajuwon was surrounded by 3 point shooters. Drexler, still at the end of his prime, was such a good all around player, he would have a great series. I think the Rockets still had good length (With Robert Horry).

The rules would impact things a bit, because both era's of players would have to adjust quite a bit. But I think my opinions stem from a basketball standpoint, a talent standpoint, more than about the Rules necessarily.

Interesting take on the Bulls. My guess is longley would be played off the court, leaving a kukoc, rodman, pip, mj, Kerr or harp lineup. Possibly 4 of 5 could switch on any screen but they were up there in age. Just something to consider since mj was resting on D when he could and Harper Would get burned by quick guards like Damon stoudamire.

Not factoring of course how Gsw would defend the bulls

Perhaps the younger 2nd championship Bulls team would a better choice. The doberman defense, mj & pip in their athletic prime, played with a higher pace, more spacing with pax & bj

It's interesting to think about the 91-92 Bulls as an opponent. Because not overly deep, they were so solid and physical. People talk about the physicality of the Pistons, but the Bulls got real physical in their own right when they started winning titles.

When Rodman Joined, it's because he was unhappy with the Spurs, and Robinson and him didn't mesh, he was also TRADED to Chicago. So Pippen was homegrown from the draft, and Rodman was traded to Chicago, how is that similar in anyway? Again, you can't compare.

lets not forget that rodman was considered a huge risk and many people did not think he would work out for them.

sorry to pick one line from your entire post but people seem to forget this all the time. they act like when the bulls got rodman it was a recipe for instant success when really he was considered a head case who could hurt them more than help them. hind sight i guess.

Interesting take on the Bulls. My guess is longley would be played off the court, leaving a kukoc, rodman, pip, mj, Kerr or harp lineup. Possibly 4 of 5 could switch on any screen but they were up there in age. Just something to consider since mj was resting on D when he could and Harper Would get burned by quick guards like Damon stoudamire.

Not factoring of course how Gsw would defend the bulls

Perhaps the younger 2nd championship Bulls team would a better choice. The doberman defense, mj & pip in their athletic prime, played with a higher pace, more spacing with pax & bj

i agree that kukoc would probably get the nod also in the matchup. i think the bulls win the match up no matter if they used todays rules or the 90's rule set. use the old rules the bulls can lock down people and use todays rules and no one and i mean no one is coming close to stopping jordan. of course the bulls would have to learn the art of flopping to play in todays nba

When Rodman Joined, it's because he was unhappy with the Spurs, and Robinson and him didn't mesh, he was also TRADED to Chicago. So Pippen was homegrown from the draft, and Rodman was traded to Chicago, how is that similar in anyway? Again, you can't compare.

lets not forget that rodman was considered a huge risk and many people did not think he would work out for them.

sorry to pick one line from your entire post but people seem to forget this all the time. they act like when the bulls got rodman it was a recipe for instant success when really he was considered a head case who could hurt them more than help them. hind sight i guess.

Fact. The worry was that Jordan, Pippen, Harper were absolute professionals, mission driven. The worry was that Rodman wouldn't fit in, or would be a distraction.

Interesting take on the Bulls. My guess is longley would be played off the court, leaving a kukoc, rodman, pip, mj, Kerr or harp lineup. Possibly 4 of 5 could switch on any screen but they were up there in age. Just something to consider since mj was resting on D when he could and Harper Would get burned by quick guards like Damon stoudamire.

Not factoring of course how Gsw would defend the bulls

Perhaps the younger 2nd championship Bulls team would a better choice. The doberman defense, mj & pip in their athletic prime, played with a higher pace, more spacing with pax & bj

i agree that kukoc would probably get the nod also in the matchup. i think the bulls win the match up no matter if they used todays rules or the 90's rule set. use the old rules the bulls can lock down people and use todays rules and no one and i mean no one is coming close to stopping jordan. of course the bulls would have to learn the art of flopping to play in todays nba

It depends on which rules we are playing by. If it's the old rules without zone defense allowed, I think they start Longley if GS starts Zaza or McGee. But, under new rules, I agree Kukoc probably gets the nod.

haha yeah glad it was pointed out. dude was taking off his shoes on the bench and driving his coach nuts. and there was still some bad blood specifically from Pip, who still has a scar from a foul rodman gave pip on a dirty play.

dee-i'm thinkng you're selling longley a bit high haha. and yes i saw him play. he moved well for his size, provided a big body, fit in the triangle, and could even hit a chip shot or 2. they seldom ran iso plays for him despite his size advantage. but hey, he gave some decent minutes during his times and persevered being a whopping boy of phil

yeah sure luc would start but once GSW put hims in the pick and roll, kukoc would get big minutes.

i think the 1st 3peat bulls were not per say physical. it's more them being able to play through tough play. those pistons were past their time even in 1990 but the bulls were still weak mentally. the bulls triangle offense was definitely a finesse game and their doberman defense was about trapping and speed.

Longley was a garbage. There's a good reasons why he quickly disappeared after he left Bulls.




One thing about 96 is that 3 point line was shorter hence the perimeter based offensive team benefiting from it. Even shy 3 point shooter like Jordan became a prolific 3 point shooter briefly for the period. Note that at age of 32, it likely helped athletically declining Jordan. And the Bulls had nice perimeter defenders so opponent didn't have it as easy against them despite the shortened 3pt line. Bottomline is that shortened 3pt line helped the Bulls. Hence the real question becomes, would it do the same for the Warriors?

Until the modern era, it was thought to be, you must have a great post player in order to win the championships. Jordan's Bulls didn't have one but every great teams did. Neither the Bulls and Warriors have one. This makes me to think the Bulls team wouldn't have a problem at all excelling in modern era basketball. As for the Warriors, I'm sure they'd do well in any era but doubtful they could dominate at the same level in era of bigs.

good points there but really, it would definitely be a challenge even for the bulls, especially older champs teams, to adjust to the modern day lineups with floor spacers at 4 positions. MJ was guarding mullin (lol) so he didn't have to chase miller or get bodied up by mark jackson in that tough 7 game series against the pacers

though i do agree GSW would struggle against any big man that can protect the paint and be a threat in the post, regardless of era.

and i think the area the 2nd 3peat bulls would get hurt on is their spacing. most teams would just play off of harper and rodman. kerr and kukoc would play more in the expense of defense.