Blatant disrespect ??? Warriors still favored to win Next Year

[Danie84]

My Knickas ain't even nowhere in the conversation, but Tankadelphia is

 

[Teko]

Look, nobody's trying to take anything away from the Cavs.

They did it. They came back. They punked GSW. Respect.

But let's not act like GSW wasn't wounded throughout this series. Between Steph needing knee surgery, Draymond getting suspended (his own damn fault), and Bogut being out (made a HUGE difference in Game 7 with garbage ass Ezeli costing them in big moments), there's no denying Warriors were a bit short-handed.

But hey, it is what it is and Cleveland won. Looking at next year, oddsmakers see this and they take it into account. So it makes sense as to why they would see GSW as the favorite.

Steph isnt getting surgery - he has always maintained that he is 100% and said that he doesnt need surgery or other nonsense his savers tried to use as an excuse, Bogut's minutes were already declining (how much time did he play last year?) and Draymond Green played in games 6 and 7 so he had plenty of opportunity to have his undeniable impact on the game. The Warriors won game 1 and 2 purely because of the bench and once the bench got shut down, the series was over.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Steph isnt getting surgery - he has always maintained that he is 100% and said that he doesnt need surgery or other nonsense his savers tried to use as an excuse.

He said he isn't getting surgery at this stage, but he never said he was 100%.

 

[T.he I.nformant]

What the hell does that have to do with my argument? Especially when you hardly see any luck/rigged posts about how the Cavs came back from being down and won the Finals. This is the double standard I'm talking about. If it were the Warriors that came back in similar circumstances it'd be the total opposite.

You can use your brain on this and look at a near-equivalent. The point was to illustrate that the Warriors were up 3-1 with a full squad and then lost the series when they were missing players. If the Cavs were up 3-1 with a full squad and then lost the series after they were missing players you wouldn't hear the end of it on this board.

Dudes already had prepackaged "agenda" posts if the Warriors won that game, saying it would only be because of the refs.



You're still not getting it. It's not about comparing which players were out - it's the point of the argument itself

- the argument last season was that the Warriors didn't and couldn't beat a contender with a full squad
- how can you use that argument, but then not apply it to the Warriors themselves if they weren't healthy or didn't have a full team (Draymond and Iggy are essential to this team, and are just as important as Kyrie/Love to the Cavs - Bogut is one of their most important defensive players too)

It's not like Iggy, Draymond and Iggy are low down on the depth chart - they're important pieces to this Warriors team.

If Kyrie was suspended for a game, and Tristan Thompson and/or JR got injured after the Cavs were up 3-1, and the Warriors went on to win the series - the luck/rigged regurgitation would be non-stop. I don't see how you can't see this? Dudes already were out to use whatever they could against this team and you don't think they would've put all their manpower behind that?

That would only make sense if the series was 0-0 or tied.

Here's the facts for the first four games:

The Warriors had basically a full strength team
The Cavs had basically a full strength team

Warriors went up 3-1. So basically when both teams were at full strength, GS were the better team (proving this theory wrong that they couldn't beat a healthy Cavs team). The Cavs won Game 5 when Draymond was out. The Cavs won Game 6 when Bogut was injured halfway through and Iggy was basically a non-factor because of his back injury from tipoff. The Cavs won Game 7 when Bogut was out.

Now like I said above, if the Cavs went up 3-1 when both teams had all their main rotational players, dudes would be claiming that when "healthy" the Cavs proved to be the better team and they'd say how the Warriors only won because a Cavs player was suspended and they had a couple of injuries. Cue the luck/rigged posts.

That's the double standard.



The Cavs are a legit champ. What is it you think I'm trying to argue here? This is the stupidity of it all. You don't use injuries as an excuse (you certainly don't use it against a team for winning), yet it's even worse if you use injuries or players being out as an excuse for one team and then don't apply the same reasoning for the other team,

So, you're mad because of the barbershop talk: conspiracy theories; hyperbole; hypocritical statements; double standards; irrational comparisons; should've, would've, could'ves; IFs; etc. In a nutshell, ALL OF THAT is the coli. You should know that by that now.

Here's a brief, stripped-down summary of what this Finals (and pretty much every Finals) is about:
- Team A tries to play it's best while making Team B play poorly.
- Team B does the same thing.
- Both teams deal with the following variables: injuries, suspensions, good/bad luck, good/bad calls. Both teams have to make adjustments in response to any of these variables.
- First team to win four games wins series.

What other questions do you have?

Also, the ONLY evidence of someone alleging that the game was rigged was from Steph's wife so miss me entirely with all that shyt you think posters were going to post about. For all the "luck/rigged" threads/posts you think people were going to write if GSW won there were probably going to be way more threads/posts about LeBron/Cleveland sucking if the Cavs lost.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

So, you're mad because of the barbershop talk: conspiracy theories; hyperbole; should've, would've, could'ves; IFs; irrational comparisons, etc. In a nutshell, ALL OF THAT is the coli. You should know that by that now.

That doesn't mean I can't call dudes out when they're being hypocrites or saying dumb shyt.

Also, the ONLY evidence of someone alleging that the game was rigged was from Steph's wife so miss me entirely with all that shyt you think posters were going to post about..

Breh you obviously haven't been paying enough attention to what dudes what said about the Warriors. It's been one of the main talking points over the last two seasons. Also it's not about thinking what posters were going to post about - they said this during the series.

For all the "luck/rigged" threads/posts you think people were going to write if GSW won there were probably going to be way more threads/posts about LeBron/Cleveland sucking if the Cavs lost.

Regardless if that were to be true or not, you know that's not the point.

 

[Bernie Madoff]

Celtics

Somebody knows something...

 

[T.he I.nformant]

That doesn't mean I can't call dudes out when they're being hypocrites or saying dumb shyt.



Breh you obviously haven't been paying enough attention to what dudes what said about the Warriors. It's been one of the main talking points over the last two seasons. Also it's not about thinking what posters were going to post about - they said this during the series.



Regardless if that were to be true or not, you know that's not the point.

You do have the right to call folks out. And I realize there have been those talking points about GSW--shyt, I took a line or two out of that book myself.

Do me a favor and respond to this part of my post:

This Finals (and pretty much every Finals) is about:
- Team A tries to play it's best while making Team B play poorly.
- Team B does the same thing.
- Both teams deal with the following variables: injuries, suspensions, good/bad luck, good/bad calls. Both teams have to make adjustments in response to any of these variables being present.
- First team to win four games wins series.

Is this not true? If yes, don't you think there's plenty for people to talk about especially if they have a vested interest in one team winning or losing? If not, why not?

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Do me a favor and respond to this part of my post:

This Finals (and pretty much every Finals) is about:
- Team A tries to play it's best while making Team B play poorly.
- Team B does the same thing.
- Both teams deal with the following variables: injuries, suspensions, good/bad luck, good/bad calls. Both teams have to make adjustments in response to any of these variables being present.
- First team to win four games wins series.

Is this not true? If yes, don't you think there's plenty for people to talk about especially if they have a vested interest in one team winning or losing? If not, why not?

Of course that's how it works. Your point in mentioning this is what exactly?

 

[R=G]

It's funny how dudes were giving the Warriors an asterisk for their title last season, but aren't applying the same logic to the Cavs this season.

Steph Curry was supposed to have been unstoppable

 

[R=G]

He said he isn't getting surgery at this stage, but he never said he was 100%.

Lol!

 

[Software]

Healthy Warriors would have beat them. But it's whatever to me.

That's what they said last year bout the cavs just stfu and take the L damn if you disregard the cavs win then you should also disregard the Warriors win last year

 

[Software]

It's funny how dudes were giving the Warriors an asterisk for their title last season, but aren't applying the same logic to the Cavs this season.

Because of all the hype surrounding this fukking golden state team that's why. Some calling them the greatest team of all time, people talking bout they better than Jordan's bulls and magics show time Lakers

 

[T.he I.nformant]

Of course that's how it works. Your point in mentioning this is what exactly?

Just making sure we're talking the same language. If you agree that that is the basic structure of how every finals finals works, you probably have an opinion on the following:
- if GSW played well and if they made the Cavs play poorly
- if the Cavs played well and if they made GSW play poorly
- how significant the variables were in impacting the outcome of the series

Lots of variables at play in these series: how well teams are playing; skill set of players; style of playing; quality of coaching; ability to make good adjustments; home court advantage; injuries; suspensions; etc. Everyone will have an opinion on how significant these variables are in impacting the outcome of who wins and who loses games.

It seems like you are saying Dray being suspended for a game, Iggy being hobbled significantly for at least a game, and Bogut being out for the last two and half games had a significant impact in the Cavs' favor. I agree that these were important events; I probably just disagree on how significant they were in determining the outcome. (GSW was still up 3-1, had two games at home, and had the reigning and unanimous MVP.)

I think GSW had some variables in its favor last year and these were more significant than the variables above in impacting the outcome of that series: Love being out the whole series and Kyrie being out all but one game were the death knell of the Cav's championship hopes last year. Majority of people thought they had no chance.

This year's finals were different. No one was saying the Warriors had no chance because Bogut is out or because Draymond got suspended. Correct me if I'm wrong but they were still the favorites in pretty much every game.

 

[Tom Foolery]

That's what they said last year bout the cavs just stfu and take the L damn if you disregard the cavs win then you should also disregard the Warriors win last year

Wtf are you even talking about? Like I said I don't give a shyt.

 

[ThaBronxBully]

They're An Attractive Place For Free Agents, Once They Drop Barnes They Gonna Add Some Decent Pieces.

They Just Gotta Hope It Doesn't fukk Up The Chemistry