Cavs will repeat

[BayArea408415]

Can you imagine how much the Warriors would've struggled if their starting PF had been out the entire series and they only had their starting PG for the first game?

Kind of irrelevant to the discussion cause we're not comparing what happened in Games 5-7 to last year's series but I know how you operate now so it's cool.

I'll admit though the Warriors would have struggled more than the Cavs because they don't have someone like LeBron with his skill/talent and Finals experience to carry them and it was their first Finals experience as a team.

On a side note, Cavs did have their starting PF this year and save for Game 7, his production was that of a role player. I won't blame him entirely though. NBA is all about matchups.

[-Sammy-]

Can you imagine how much the Warriors would've struggled if their starting PF had been out the entire series and they only had their starting PG for the first game?

Kind of irrelevant to the argument cause we're not comparing what happened in Games 5-7 to last year's series but I know how you operate now so it's cool.

Yeah-- I hold every team to the same standard instead of skewing the data to fit my agenda. I realize that's not how you operate, but I hope you can learn to live with it.

And Cavs did have their starting PF this year and save for Game 7, his production was that of a role player.

That's true; it's a good thing for Cleveland that's all he needed to do for them to win the title.

[BayArea408415]

Yeah-- I hold every team to the same standard instead of skewing the data to fit my agenda. I realize that's not how you operate, but I hope you can learn to live with it.

How so? We were comparing parts of this series (Games 1-4) to (Games 5-7) to one another. Or Games 3-7 and 1-4. It can be broken down in various ways.

If we were comparing both series as a whole or the historical match-up between the teams, you would have a very valid point. If we're comparing just parts of this series, nothing is being skewed and last year is irrelevant.

That's true; it's a good thing for Cleveland that's all he needed to do for them to win the title.

Yes, because LeBron and Irving did everything else with the defensive/rebounding contributions from Thompson and pockets of crucial role-player scoring from JR.

[-Sammy-]

Yeah-- I hold every team to the same standard instead of skewing the data to fit my agenda. I realize that's not how you operate, but I hope you can learn to live with it.

How so? We were comparing parts of this series (Games 1-4) to (Games 5-7) to one another. If we were comparing both series as a whole or the historical match-up between the teams, you would have a very valid point. No need for the sarcasm or basically personal attack.

I was comparing one series between two teams with another series between the same two teams; I'm sure you can grasp the salience. I wasn't being sarcastic, and I wasn't attacking you; you made reference to the way I 'operate', so I made reference to the way you 'operate'. I'm not sure why that would offend you, but I'm sorry if it did.

[BayArea408415]

I was comparing one series between two teams with another series between the same two teams. I'm sure you can see the salience. I wasn't being sarcastic, and I wasn't attacking you; you made reference to the way I 'operate' and I did the same. I'm not sure why that would offend you, but I apologize if it did.

Yes, you were, which was kind of irrelevant to the conversation between me and imposer. What did last year exactly have to do with the comparison between two parts (Games 1-4, 5-7 or now 3-7) of this year's series? The significance of your comparison is important if we were comparing both series but we weren't.

The way you operate wasn't meant as an insult. Just that I now know you are a fairly sarcastic/witty guy that likes to poke fun at teams you don't like. Now, your statement about how I do/don't operate is definitely insulting. I wasn't skewing anything as I wasn't comparing the series from this year to last year or even the overall matchup between both teams.

[Heat3]

if green gets a technical instead of a flagrant this thread would be titled warriors will three peat

[AIfan3]

if green gets a technical instead of a flagrant this thread would be titled warriors will three peat

If Kevin Durant hits 2 or three shots in game 6 the Warriors don't even make the finals..

[FirstInkTDot]

I'm sorry to burst all of your bubbles but.... Raps in 4

[AIfan3]

Warriors are not going to be the same after this loss. Assuming Durant doesn't go to GSW, nothing really stands in the way of Lebron and the Cavs.

healthy Curry?

Curry wasn't injured. Said it himself..

[BayArea408415]

if green gets a technical instead of a flagrant this thread would be titled warriors will three peat

If Kevin Durant hits 2 or three shots in game 6 the Warriors don't even make the finals..

Totally agree. Just like if Barnes shoots 45% or even 39% instead of 5-32, he probably wouldn't be let go by the Warriors.

[-Sammy-]

I was comparing one series between two teams with another series between the same two teams. I'm sure you can see the salience. I wasn't being sarcastic, and I wasn't attacking you; you made reference to the way I 'operate' and I did the same. I'm not sure why that would offend you, but I apologize if it did.

Yes, you were, which was kind of irrelevant to the conversation between me and imposer. What did last year exactly have to do with the comparison between two parts (Games 1-4, 5-7 or now 3-7) of this year's series?

The significance is pretty obvious, but I'll spell it out for you: all the discussion about which players missed what games for each team and why arises because the root issue is which team is objectively better, all things being equal. You referenced the players GS was without, and those are valid points for obvious reasons, but the underlying question isn't really which team won which series or why-- it's which team is ultimately better. That's why last year's series is a relevant sub-topic of the main topic.

The way you operate wasn't meant as an insult.

Oh, I never accused you trying to insult me. You're the one who suggested that I was making a personal attack; I was just explaining why that wasn't the case.

Just that I now know you are a fairly sarcastic/witty guy...

Well, I think you're giving me too much credit, but I appreciate the compliment.

...that likes to poke fun at teams you don't like.

No, I don't have any issues with the Ws. I do, however, have a low tolerance for people who cherry-pick data and insult other teams, and you've been guilty of both, which is why I've gone in on you a bit recently. Or was it a different 'BayArea408415' who wrote this after game five?:

Celebrating in Cleveland will be more enjoyable. Rub it into LeBron and that miserable franchise. Despise the franchise and Lebitch.

[BayArea408415]

[
The significance is pretty obvious, but I'll spell it out for you: all the discussion about which players missed what games for each team and why arises because the root issue is which team is objectively better, all things being equal. You referenced the players GS was without, and those are valid points for obvious reasons, but the final question isn't really which team won which series or why-- it's which team is ultimately better. That's why last year's series is a relevant sub-topic of the main topic.

The main-topic of the thread is whether the Cavs will repeat. Not whether Golden State or the Cavs are objectively better over the past 2 years.

We (I and imposer) weren't discussing (or at least I wasn't) which team is objectively better over the past 2 years or even this series. We were discussing who was the better team in different parts of this series only. LeBron and Kyrie going god-mode and players missing games were parts that effected a part (Games 5-7) of the series.

Cavs won the series. Clearly they were better in this series. Your points about Irving and Love from last year are important if we were discussing who is objectively better (not the root issue I was discussing) over the past 2 years and I accept that but that wasn't the topic of this thread nor what I was discussing with (imposer). I admit my point about players missing games in this series may be construed as "cherry-picking" in an argument about who "is objectively better" but that wasn't my intent as I wasn't discussing that.

Oh, I never accused you trying to insult me. You're the one who suggested that I was making a personal attack; I was just explaining why that wasn't the case.

No, I understand. Often times, people still might assume as much. I edited the personal attack portion out. You quoted me before I was finished editing my post. I felt my original wording was unfair or wrong.

No, I don't have any issues with the Ws. I do, however, have a low tolerance for people who cherry-pick data and insult other teams, and you've been guilty of both, which is why I've gone in on you a bit recently. Or, was it a different BayArea408415 who wrote this after game five?:

viewtopic

.php?f=6&t=1452363&start=4420#start_here

"Well, that's fair. I AM going in on the team I don't like, but that's just the nature of the beast"

I think it's fair to say you aren't a fan of the Dubs. Also, I was not cherry-picking data considering I wasn't discussing who is objectively better as a team. That's what you made the topic about to get your point across and go "in" on me. Me and imposer were discussing who was better in certain parts of this series.

I have insulted the Cavs before and am not apologizing for it. I don't like the franchise and am not going to pretend that I do. Many opposing fans have insulted the Warriors and our players over the past year and after we lost to the Cavs but I haven't seen you go in on them but that's because you're not exactly a fan of the Dubs I suppose. It's not an issue anyways. Like you said "nature of the beast."

[Pennebaker]

They'd be going for the three-peat if Kyrie didn't get injured last year.

[-Sammy-]

[
The significance is pretty obvious, but I'll spell it out for you: all the discussion about which players missed what games for each team and why arises because the root issue is which team is objectively better, all things being equal. You referenced the players GS was without, and those are valid points for obvious reasons, but the final question isn't really which team won which series or why-- it's which team is ultimately better. That's why last year's series is a relevant sub-topic of the main topic.

The main-topic of the thread is whether the Cavs will repeat. Not whether Golden State or the Cavs are objectively better over the past 2 years.

Of course, but tangential discussions always arise in threads like these. What happened in games 1-4 and 5-7 isn't the main topic of the thread, either, but you're still discussing it here.

No, I don't have any issues with the Ws. I do, however, have a low tolerance for people who cherry-pick data and insult other teams, and you've been guilty of both, which is why I've gone in on you a bit recently. Or, was it a different BayArea408415 who wrote this after game five?:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1452363&start=4420#start_here

"Well, that's fair. I AM going in on the team I don't like, but that's just the nature of the beast"

I think it's fair to say you aren't a fan of the Dubs.

Touche! That's fair. To clarify the comment you linked to, I was referring to the Ws relative to the Cavs in the series (the Cavs were my pick, so the Ws were the enemy in the series), but your point stands.

Also, I was not cherry-picking data considering I wasn't discussing who is objectively better as a team.

Well, I use the term 'cherry-picking' fairly liberally, to be fair. What I've noticed from you- in this thread a bit, but more blatantly in other places- is a tendency to emphasize certain facts, de-emphasize others, and do so in a 'leading' way, and I maintain that it's cherry-picking, after a fashion. It's cherry-picking by implication, and the implication in this thread is that the Cavs won because the Ws had key personnel missing or injured.

I have insulted the Cavs before and am not apologizing for it. I don't like the franchise and am not going to pretend that I do.

Well, at least you're honest; props for that, anyhow.

[BayArea408415]

Of course, but tangential discussions always arise in threads like these. What happened in games 1-4 and 5-7 isn't the main topic of the thread, either, but you're still discussing it here.

Fair enough but I don't like going in off-topic tangents even if they are semi-related to the topic. Correct, the discussion between me and imposer wasn't really on topic either but it was straight forward and not bringing past heated discussions into it. He made his point and I made mine. It was over too I think.

[
Touche! That's fair. To clarify the comment you linked to, I was referring to the Ws relative to the Cavs in the series (the Cavs were my pick, so the Ws were the enemy in the series), but your point stands.

I wasn't aware it was only for the series. But okay.

Well, I use the term 'cherry-picking' fairly liberally, to be fair. What I've noticed from you- in this thread a bit, but more blatantly in other places- is a tendency to emphasize certain facts, de-emphasize others, and do so in a 'leading' way, and I maintain that it's cherry-picking, after a fashion. It's cherry-picking by implication, and the implication in this thread is that the Cavs won because the Ws had key personnel missing or injured.

Well, it's similar to what Cavs or other non-Warriors fans said when discussing this series. Emphasize facts like LeBron's god-mode and Irving's insane scoring punches and own god-mode or the Cavs defense making Klay and Steph incompetent/causing them to miss open shots while ignoring or de-emphasizing other facts that effected and changed the series. It's not something limited to me. It's quite common across the board. Just part of how fans personal biases slip in.

I totally get the implication you are deriving from my post but while it may have been true in past instances. It was not my attention here. If you don't believe me, not much I can say to change that.

Well, at least you're honest; props for that, anyhow.

I can accept they were better than us though and did congratulate them on winning the Finals.

[-Sammy-]

Spoiler:

Of course, but tangential discussions always arise in threads like these. What happened in games 1-4 and 5-7 isn't the main topic of the thread, either, but you're still discussing it here.

Fair enough but I don't like going in off-topic tangents even if they are semi-related to the topic. Correct, the discussion between me and imposer wasn't really on topic either but it was straight forward and not bringing past heated discussions into it. He made his point and I made mine. It was over too I think.

[
Touche! That's fair. To clarify the comment you linked to, I was referring to the Ws relative to the Cavs in the series (the Cavs were my pick, so the Ws were the enemy in the series), but your point stands.

I wasn't aware it was only for the series. But okay.

Well, I use the term 'cherry-picking' fairly liberally, to be fair. What I've noticed from you- in this thread a bit, but more blatantly in other places- is a tendency to emphasize certain facts, de-emphasize others, and do so in a 'leading' way, and I maintain that it's cherry-picking, after a fashion. It's cherry-picking by implication, and the implication in this thread is that the Cavs won because the Ws had key personnel missing or injured.

Well, it's similar to what Cavs or other non-Warriors fans said when discussing this series. Emphasize facts like LeBron's god-mode and Irving's insane scoring punches and own god-mode or the Cavs defense making Klay and Steph incompetent/causing them to miss open shots while ignoring or de-emphasizing other facts that effected and changed the series. It's not something limited to me. It's quite common across the board. Just part of how fans personal biases slip in.

I totally get the implication you are deriving from my post but while it may have been true in past instances. It was not my attention here. If you don't believe me, not much I can say to change that.

Well, at least you're honest; props for that, anyhow.

I can accept they were better than us though and did congratulate them on winning the Finals.

[ILOVEIT]

Wow....no words.

Other than...yes...The team that was down 3-1 in the finals before a suspension and a game 7 win by a few...is very likely to repeat....The West just sucks.

[Dr_CharOh]

if green gets a technical instead of a flagrant this thread would be titled warriors will three peat

We can play the "if" game, but the Warriors still had 2 more tries to win the championship. I think I'm in doubt that the Warriors would've won regardless. Klay Thompson just had to make LeBron angry. That itself was a huge factor in GSW's demise.

[Asianiac_24]

if green gets a technical instead of a flagrant this thread would be titled warriors will three peat

We can play the "if" game, but the Warriors still had 2 more tries to win the championship. I think I'm in doubt that the Warriors would've won regardless. Klay Thompson just had to make LeBron angry. That itself was a huge factor in GSW's demise.

Or the NBA doesn't suspend Green to extend the series, the Warriors with their complete healthy lineup and all the momentum, AT HOME, wins the championship at 5 and we all talk about whether or not the Cavs should be blown up. Green/Lebron altercation had nothing that screams flagrant in it.

[garrick]

Warriors, OKC and Spurts need to blow it up and rebuild.

LBJ en route to a three peat.