Which of the last 11 Western Conference champs could last year's Warriors beat in a 7 game series?

[Da King]

6 people actually voted for the 2014 Spurs, the team with the dominant finals victory in NBA history against a back to back NBA champion


this is why I can't take Coli posters opinions seriously on basketball

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Not sure what you mean by "offensive momentum".

Put it like this, if the officials clamped down on the contact; freeing up the play - resulting in the Cavs being less aggressive on the defensive end (getting with extra contact in the paint, Delly holding Curry and bumping him off screens etc etc) not wanting to get into foul trouble - the Warriors would be able to go on more runs. Granted, yes you can apply the same thing to the Cavs, however as you know they were undermanned and didn't have half the scorers - meaning they wouldn't be able to trade buckets regularly enough to stay within reach each time the Warriors went on a run.

but slowing the game down definitely helps the Cavs, granted there's some trade off because Golden State was deeper, but getting Iggy or Draymond into foul trouble would've been disastrous for them, would have meant more Bogut and more Barnes on Lebron.

And what if Delly, Shumpert, Tristan or Mozgov found themselves in foul trouble? The Warriors could manage without either Draymond or Iggy - they have the depth. Cleveland didn't. GS could still maintain their aggressiveness - the Cavs couldn't. The dilemma for them would be, do they risk their players fouling out (do they ease up on defense) or does Blatt switch them with Perkins, Marion, Haywood, Miller and Harris.

Golden State's offense is based on rhythm, in that regard a lot of whistles isn't good for them. That's the main reason the Cavs were sitting on the ball for 20+ seconds per possession.

Whistles are good for their offense, because when teams are conscious of the refs officiating in a certain way (clamping down on extra/unnecessary contact) - the defensive pressure starts easing up and the advantage from being physical that teams had is now gone. GS couldn't develop any rhythm when they were being pushed and pulled all in the halfcourt.

 

[ghostwriterx]

Put it like this, if the officials clamped down on the contact; freeing up the play - resulting in the Cavs being less aggressive on the defensive end (getting with extra contact in the paint, Delly holding Curry and bumping him off screens etc etc) not wanting to get into foul trouble - the Warriors would be able to go on more runs. Granted, yes you can apply the same thing to the Cavs, however as you know they were undermanned and didn't have half the scorers - meaning they wouldn't be able to trade buckets regularly enough to stay within reach each time the Warriors went on a run.

And what if Delly, Shumpert, Tristan or Mozgov found themselves in foul trouble? The Warriors could manage without either Draymond or Iggy - they have the depth. Cleveland didn't. GS could still maintain their aggressiveness - the Cavs couldn't. The dilemma for them would be, do they risk their players fouling out (do they ease up on defense) or does Blatt switch them with Perkins, Marion, Haywood, Miller and Harris.

Whistles are good for their offense, because when teams are conscious of the refs officiating in a certain way (clamping down on extra/unnecessary contact) - the defensive pressure starts easing up and the advantage from being physical that teams had is now gone. GS couldn't develop any rhythm when they were being pushed and pulled all in the halfcourt.

Yeah, good points. I thought GS offense was fine after game 3 and the entire Cavs team was gassed so I don't think the clutching and grabbing had any real effect. Cavs starters playing all those minutes was a gift and a curse. And don't forget nobody other than Bron could get to the line with any consistency, for a team that bad offensively getting in the penalty would be huge.

In general I think the better defensive team is going to benefit more from the refs swallowing their whistles, especially against a team that struggles to score.

Now if Kyrie and Love were playing it would definitely be an advantage for Cleveland to have less whistles.

 

[ghostwriterx]

They just played MVP Runner Up version of James Harden and ol boy struggled... badly.

I really have no comeback to what Durant would do. Truth is, we don't know.

Klay Thompson is a better defender than Chalmers. What I was trying to say is Westbrook trying to be the X-Factor in that series is not what you want because he takes shots from Durant.

Its all speculation but I don't see it, breh. This year's Thunder team would be interesting against them though

Harden had 3 great games and two bad ones. I wouldn't say he struggled. He wasn't as good with the Thunder, but I don't think anyone on GS's bench was going to do anything with him. I do tend to agree current Thunder would be a better matchup, Westbrook is better now.

 

[Reid2Achieve]

Harden had 3 great games and two bad ones. I wouldn't say he struggled. He wasn't as good with the Thunder, but I don't think anyone on GS's bench was going to do anything with him. I do tend to agree current Thunder would be a better matchup, Westbrook is better now.

That game 5 just leaves such a bad taste in my mouf that it's a lasting memory

 

[ChriscoDash]

ANY Spurs team could beat them as long as it has Tony Manu and Tim. Those are the 3 keys of they winnings.

 

[ChriscoDash]

All of them

You crazy

 

[Bilz]

Beat no healthy teams. This "dominant" team struggled against a PG with a broken face and some muthafukka named dellavedova.

The Grizzlies are trash but the other teams they faced were good.

 

[G.O.A.T Squad Spokesman]

The Grizzlies are trash but the other teams they faced were good.

The Grizzlies are trash.