The Legacies Of The Cavs,Warriors And...Gil Scott Herion

[ghostwriterx]

Its kind of funny seeing so many people talk about Harrison Barnes' futility in this thread. As if an all time great team's success should rest on the shoulders of their fourth option. Imagine if the 96 Bulls blew a 3-1 lead in the series and afterwards cats were saying, "Yeah, but they would've won if Ron Harper hadn't shot 30%"

The 72-10 Bulls won the Finals in 6 games. You know what Pip shot in that series? 34% from the field 23% from 3. He was their second best player.

All-time great teams find a way to get it done.

 

[Consumed]

It's a break that was completely avoidable and a Warrior was at fault. Thusly it can't be compared to an injury.

I didn't compare them. I just made the point that that stuff you were using to try to boost them was true about those Suns as well so thusly it's irrelevant. Their body of work is a championship, none of that other stuff is worth anything without rings . They got one, just like the Sonics in the 70s and Mavericks a few years ago. They certainly have ATG potential but you gotta actually do it.

I mean, it also would have been avoided if LeBron doesn't step over him and speak about the incident candidly in the post game press conference. He played an active role in that as did the Cavs FO putting pressure on the league to do something about it.

but the suns never won a title. Had they ever done so they would have gotten acknowledgement for being an all time great team just as the KG Celtics are (added more about them in my previous post, but they are absolutely ATG status even though they have just one ring). The '11 Mavericks aren't that because they don't really have anything about them that's historically significant or dominant outside of Dirk going wild. And they couldn't even sustain that team for longer than one season

I can't really subscribe to completely eliminating the regular season or the quality of basketball a team plays over an entire campaign just to focus on their ring count. What you do that's historically significant over a stretch of time matters. Every single era in this leagues history spans multiple ATG squads and for the Warriors to not be one of them from this era would be crazy talk. 25 years from now it won't even be a discussion but now I guess it'll take some time for people to really get on board with how ridiculous this team has been these past two years

 

[Malta]

Yea maybe the Cavs could beat the Showtime Lakers Mike's Bulls and 'em too huh? Why aren't you in here helping your boy fight this "GS is an all time great team" fight because you were right there with him?

They are an all-time great team I also said the Cavs were the perfect team to beat them.


Your thirst for my opinion is comedy, claim you don't respect someone's opinion yet fiend for it like a bytch

 

[HoopLife]

Its kind of funny seeing so many people talk about Harrison Barnes' futility in this thread. As if an all time great team's success should rest on the shoulders of their fourth option. Imagine if the 96 Bulls blew a 3-1 lead in the series and afterwards cats were saying, "Yeah, but they would've won if Ron Harper hadn't shot 30%"

The 72-10 Bulls won the Finals in 6 games. You know what Pip shot in that series? 34% from the field 23% from 3. He was their second best player.

All-time great teams find a way to get it done.

If Curry doesn't score 17 points in a game 7 than we wouldn't be having this convo. Nikkas keep ignoring the elephant in the room

 

[Gravity]

They are an all-time great team I also said the Cavs were the perfect team to beat them.

Save the corny shyt man. So where's your argument for them still being all time great? Why have you abandoned your boy leaving him to fight this battle by himself when you were right there with him before they go exposed?

at them still being atg after bein exposed. at the Cavs just being the perfect team to beat them. The Cavs aren't a perfect team in any context. They could've easily lost in 5 or 7 just like GS could've easily lost in 6 against OKC.

If Curry doesn't score 17 points in a game 7 than we wouldn't be having this convo. Nikkas keep ignoring the elephant in the room

Thats why they wouldn't be atg even if they won.

 

[ghostwriterx]

Well clearly you were watching a different series to me (and everyone else). They were the very definition of complacent as soon as they went up 3-1.

How exactly did they get complacent?

They didn't get shut down for long stretches during that series, in fact they were given open looks (mostly role players) for long stretches. They had 19 open 3-pt attempts in G5 and only made FOUR of them - that's the type of shyt that was on offer. Barnes went 5-32 over the last three games, on mostly open shots. Their uncontested shot-rate in G6 was even worse from all over the floor. Down the stretch of G7, almost half of their shots missed were open looks.

For the series the teams were about even on open looks. GSW was slightly better.

GSW

NBA.com/Stats

NBA.com/Stats

Meanwhile in last year's Finals. The Cavs shot way worse on open shots.

BTW notice the Warriors shot just about the same on open shots in this year's Finals as they did last year (slightly better in some areas ex. wide open 3s).

The Cavs weren't doing anything spectacular on defense, the Warriors were just shytting the bed on offense and couldn't do a damn thing to stop LeBron/Kyrie on the other end.

They missed more as the series wore on, you don't think that had anything to do with the Cavs strategy, extremely physical on defense, attacking Steph on the other end, closing off the paint etc.? Granted something like is just about impossible to quantify. Could just be they ran extremely hot early in the series and regressed to the mean as the series grew longer.

 

[Malta]

Save the corny shyt man. So where's your argument for them being all time great? Why have you abandoned your boy leaving him to fight this battle by himself when you were right there with him before they go exposed?

at them still being atg after bein exposed. at the Cavs just being the perfect team to beat them. The Cavs aren't a perfect team in any context. They could've easily lost in 5 or 7 just GS could've easily lost in 6 against OKC.

What corny shyt? You always want my opinion


Before they got "exposed" I said the Cavs had all the right tools to beat them in 7, why is this so difficult for you to grasp? They didn't lose in 5 or 7, they won and the Cavs were the perfect matchup for the Warriors. You're trying to argue with me for the sake of it, when I always had the Cavs as a bigger threat to them than any other team Asking how a team is alltime after they went 67-15 winning the title, then 73-9 is the definition of pressed.


You so pressed for my take, sitting around wondering why nobody is @'ing me about the Warriors

 

[Gravity]

Before they got "exposed" I said the Cavs had all the right tools to beat them in 7, why is this so difficult for you to grasp? They didn't lose in 5 or 7, they won and the Cavs were the perfect matchup for the Warriors. You're trying to argue with me for the sake of it, when I always had the Cavs as a bigger threat to them than any other team Asking how a team is alltime after they went 67-15 winning the title, then 73-9 is the definition of pressed.

Ok you predicted that the Cavs could beat them, and? So did I. If anything that just contradicts your stance that GS is one of the best teams of all time. If you truly believed that GS is one of the best teams of all time then why would you even have given this Cavs team a shot to beat them? The Cavs didn't win because they played like one of the best teams ever, they won because GS choked away a 3-1 lead and didn't play anywhere near as good as they played during the regular season. You see those regular seasons don't really mean shyt. NBA teams are judged by what they do in the playoffs and GS's performance in the playoffs doesn't qualify them as one of the best teams ever.

at putting exposed in quotation marks as if they weren't exposed.

 

[Malta]

Ok you predicted that the Cavs could beat them, and? So did I. If anything that just contradicts your stance that GS is one of the best teams of all time. If you truly believed that GS is one of the best teams of all time then why would you even have given this Cavs team a shot to beat them? The Cavs didn't win because they played like one of the best teams ever, they won because GS choked away a 3-1 lead and didn't play anywhere near as good as they played during the regular season. You see those regular seasons don't really mean shyt. NBA teams are judged by what they do in the playoffs and GS's performance in the playoffs doesn't qualify them as one of the best teams ever.

at putting exposed in quotation marks as if they weren't exposed.

How does it contradict anything? If this were 80s your dumbass would be saying the same shyt about the Celtics not being an all-time team because they won 1 title, then lost the next two years without even reaching the finals (swept with HC). The Warriors are an all-time team, the Cavs would be looked at differently if Kyrie hadn't missed 29 games but that hurts your stance. And most importantly, there are several teams that are considered all-time that only won 1 title too, all those old heads who you love to quote swear by 1 of them as the greatest team ever too, which makes your position even more idiotic.


I still am @ how pressed you are to talk to me

 

[FTBS]

I mean, it also would have been avoided if LeBron doesn't step over him and speak about the incident candidly in the post game press conference. He played an active role in that as did the Cavs FO putting pressure on the league to do something about it.

but the suns never won a title. Had they ever done so they would have gotten acknowledgement for being an all time great team just as the KG Celtics are (added more about them in my previous post, but they are absolutely ATG status even though they have just one ring). The '11 Mavericks aren't that because they don't really have anything about them that's historically significant or dominant outside of Dirk going wild. And they couldn't even sustain that team for longer than one season

I can't really subscribe to completely eliminating the regular season or the quality of basketball a team plays over an entire campaign just to focus on their ring count. What you do that's historically significant over a stretch of time matters. Every single era in this leagues history spans multiple ATG squads and for the Warriors to not be one of them from this era would be crazy talk. 25 years from now it won't even be a discussion but now I guess it'll take some time for people to really get on board with how ridiculous this team has been these past two years

Only active part was Draymond racking up stupid flagrants and going for nikkas' nuts. And he flopped on that play too. It all could have been avoided if he keeps his feet to himself, respects other men's nuts, and stays on his feet. at the spinning that has been done on his behalf in this.

You realize you just supported my point with the Suns right? None of the historic stuff they did matters because they didn't win the chip. They were historically significant over time yet it doesn't matter because they didn't win. The Warriors got a ring so they are beyond them but they still aren't ATG yet.

Of course you can't subscribe to that because you want your team to be heralded as an all-time great one . I agree that what you do over time is important. That's why they gotta add more rings if they are to be all-time great. In 25 years this Warriors team will be nothing more than a footnote if they don't add some more jewelry (see 80's 6ers). Meanwhile the Lakers and Celtics and Jordan's Bulls are still held up as the standard to this day.

 

[Gravity]

How does it contradict anything? If this were 80s your dumbass would be saying the same shyt about the Celtics not being an all-time team because they won 1 title, then lost the next two years without even reaching the finals (swept with HC).

It's a contradiction because you haven't been running around hyping the Cavs as one of the best teams ever like you have GS. If you thought the Cavs were just as good or better than they why haven't you been hyping them up as one of the best teams ever?

The 80s Celtics weren't considered one of the best teams ever after one title dummy.

They are an all-time team, the Cavs would be looked at differently if Kyrie hadn't missed 29 games but that hurts your stance.

It hurts my stance how? Why would the Cavs be looked at differently? I saw you say some shyt about the Cavs winning between 64-68 games had Kyrie not missed 29 games which makes no sense seeing how Cleveland had a better record during the first 41 games(30-11) which Kyrie missed the majority than they did in the last 41 games(27-14) which Kyrie played the majority of. They were never on a 60 win pace with Kyrie so what did you even base that dumb shyt on?

And most importantly, there are several teams that are considered all-time that only won 1 title too, all those old heads who you love to quote swear by 1 of them as the greatest team ever too, which makes your position even more idiotic.


I still am @ how pressed you are to talk to me

That's irrelevant because GS doesn't even measure up to those teams. They're not even one of the best one title teams. The teams that are considered great one year teams all dominated in the post season en route to getting a title. The 83' sixers aren't revered for what they did in the regular season. They're revered for running thru the playoffs 4-5-4 leaving no doubt as to who was the best team in the league that year. GS hasn't dominated on that level. There are questions as to whether they were the best team last year and they failed to prove that they're the best team this year.

 

[Malta]

It's a contradiction because you haven't been running around hyping the Cavs as one of the best teams ever like you have GS. If you thought the Cavs were just as good or better than they why haven't you been hyping them up as one of the best teams ever?

The 80s Celtics weren't considered one of the best teams ever after one title dummy.



It hurts my stance how? Why would the Cavs be looked at differently? I saw you say some shyt about the Cavs winning between 64-68 games had Kyrie not missed 29 games which makes no sense seeing how Cleveland had a better record during the first 41 games(30-11) which Kyrie missed the majority than they did in the last 41 games(27-14) which Kyrie played the majority of. They were never on a 60 win pace with Kyrie so what did you even base that dumb shyt on?

That's irrelevant because GS doesn't even measure up to those teams. Their not even one of the best one title teams. The teams that are considered great one year teams all dominated in the post season en route to getting a title. The 83' sixers aren't revered for why they did in the regular season. They're revered for runnin thru the playoffs 4-5-4 leaving no doubt as to who was the best team in the league that year. GS hasn't dominated on that level. There are questions as to whether they were the best team last year and they failed to prove that they're the best team this year.

Too long doeboy, you know I'm not reading this.


Keep it short, remember YOU want to talk to me, not vice versa

 

[Gravity]

Too long doeboy, you know I'm not reading this.


Keep it short, remember YOU want to talk to me, not vice versa

Your bytchassness doesn't hurt me. Pretend not to read all you want you feminine ass bytch

 

[Consumed]

Only active part was Draymond racking up stupid flagrants and going for nikkas' nuts. And he flopped on that play too. It all could have been avoided if he keeps his feet to himself, respects other men's nuts, and stays on his feet. at the spinning that has been done on his behalf in this.

You realize you just supported my point with the Suns right? None of the historic stuff they did matters because they didn't win the chip. They were historically significant over time yet it doesn't matter because they didn't win. The Warriors got a ring so they are beyond them but they still aren't ATG yet.

Of course you can't subscribe to that because you want your team to be heralded as an all-time great one . I agree that what you do over time is important. That's why they gotta add more rings if they are to be all-time great. In 25 years this Warriors team will be nothing more than a footnote if they don't add some more jewelry (see 80's 6ers). Meanwhile the Lakers and Celtics and Jordan's Bulls are still held up as the standard to this day.

It could have also been avoided if LeBron doesn't step over him. There's no spinning here, that's just reality. Both sides played a part in that altercation.

Did you ignore where I explained why the KG Celtics were an all time great team because they established a reputation as one of the best defenses in league history en route to a championship. If the Suns were to win a title on top of their revolutionary offensive approach they would be an all time great team in a similar way. The Warriors are that now. It's just a matter of how high they can climb.

The 80's 76ers are not a footnote to those privy to NBA history. Moses' Fo Fo Fo prediction is absolutely legendary. Prior to his signing those teams were really just a top center away from winning it all anyway going toe to toe with the Celtics/Lakers for several years and he helped to fill that void and then some in '83.

I'm entirely objective here and would not care at all about the Warriors if they weren't playing basketball at a historical level for two straight seasons. If you see this team as nothing but a footnate 25 years from now I question your perspective on this game.

 

[Malta]

Your bytchassness doesn't hurt. Pretend not to read all you want you feminine ass bytch

I legit didn't read it, your other posts were short. Once you start multi-quoting one post I'm out , you know the rules

@ people to talk to them and get mad they don't read your novels when they told you they ain't reading long winded posts from you