The Warriors are better without KD

rcontador · Post #1 » by **rcontador** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:07 am

Every time he sits out they switch back into 2016 Warriors god mode. He comes back and they still win, but it's clunky, and upsets come easier. They'll win the title with or without him, because they have 10x the talent of anybody else... but it's time to call a spade a spade. He makes them worse.

Tetlak · Post #2 » by **Tetlak** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:08 am

Absolutely not.

xfactor · Post #3 » by **xfactor** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:09 am

rcontador wrote:Every time he sits out they switch back into 2016 Warriors god mode. He comes back and they still win, but it's clunky, and upsets come easier. They'll win the title with or without him, because they have 10x the talent of anybody else... but it's time to call a spade a spade. He makes them worse.

Just a reminder. The 2016 'god mode' Warriors are NOT the champions.

76ciology · Post #4 » by **76ciology** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:09 am

..until they play the top teams in the west.

OptionZero · Post #5 » by **OptionZero** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:12 am

for some reason people don't understand that the answer is short term yes long term no.

They COULD win the title without KD; the margin for error gets pretty small. KD is not only a large factor himself, he also has expandability to cover for an injury to Curry, dray, or klay.

Likewise, curry, dray and klay are good enough to cover for a KD injury

its about degree of difficulty

but whatevers, dumbasses will keep posting this garbage

SimonFish · Post #6 » by **SimonFish** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:14 am

yes and the cavs are better without lebron, spurs are better without kawhi.

Fico92 · Post #7 » by **Fico92** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:14 am

OptionZero wrote:for some reason people don't understand that the answer is short term yes long term no.

They COULD win the title without KD; the margin for error gets pretty small. KD is not only a large factor himself, he also has expandability to cover for an injury to Curry, dray, or klay.

Likewise, curry, dray and klay are good enough to cover for a KD injury

its about degree of difficulty

but whatevers, dumbasses will keep posting this garbage

Whoa man why so mad? Relax :lol:

homecourtloss · Post #8 » by **homecourtloss** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:19 am

SimonFish wrote:yes and the cavs are better without lebron, spurs are better without kawhi.

Durant is not the Warriors' best player--Curry is.

In addition, neither the Cavs nor the Spurs have the luxury of having another top 3 type player on the roster to ameliorate for the loss of a star player.

But in any case, in a series against an elite team, the Warriors are better with Durant. The players don't know their roles as well and they curiously don't defend as well when he's in there, but against elite teams in a 7 game series, they're better with KD as he will allow them to hedge against more randomness, combat opponents' hot shooting streaks with his own, etc. They might not look as cohesive, but they will be more difficult to defeat 4 times in a seven game span.

rcontador · Post #9 » by **rcontador** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:20 am

SimonFish wrote:yes and the cavs are better without lebron, spurs are better without kawhi.

Refresh my memory — did the Cavs without Lebron win 73 games? If so, this might be true.

Mylie10 · Post #10 » by **Mylie10** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:27 am

The Warriors are better without KD like PBJ's are better without the Jelly? Not

Post #11 » by **jbk1234** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:32 am

They should cut him tbh.

SimonFish · Post #12 » by **SimonFish** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:32 am

rcontador wrote:
SimonFish wrote:yes and the cavs are better without lebron, spurs are better without kawhi.

Refresh my memory — did the Cavs without Lebron win 73 games? If so, this might be true.

xfactor wrote:Just a reminder. The 2016 'god mode' Warriors are NOT the champions.

linkz1993 · Post #13 » by **linkz1993** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:34 am

Kd in a lineup against Cleveland makes Irving have to guard curry or thompson, in the finals they had this dude on Barnes like 70% of the time , and you also now have to make Lebron actually guard someone ..

Oh and even better spacing for everyone to operate..

SimonFish · Post #14 » by **SimonFish** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:35 am

homecourtloss wrote:
SimonFish wrote:yes and the cavs are better without lebron, spurs are better without kawhi.

Durant is not the Thunder's best player--Westbrook is.

In addition, neither the Cavs nor the Spurs have the luxury of having another top 3 type player on the roster to ameliorate for the loss of a star player.

But in any case, in a series against an elite team, the Thunder are better with Durant. The players don't know their roles as well and they curiously don't defend as well when he's in there, but against elite teams in a 7 game series, they're better with KD.

ftfy - m i doing it right?

SFrush · Post #15 » by **SFrush** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:38 am

rcontador wrote:Every time he sits out they switch back into 2016 Warriors god mode. He comes back and they still win, but it's clunky, and upsets come easier. They'll win the title with or without him, because they have 10x the talent of anybody else... but it's time to call a spade a spade. He makes them worse.

Complete nonsense. smh

homecourtloss · Post #16 » by **homecourtloss** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:40 am

SimonFish wrote:
homecourtloss wrote:
SimonFish wrote:yes and the cavs are better without lebron, spurs are better without kawhi.

Durant is not the Thunder's best player--Westbrook is.

In addition, neither the Cavs nor the Spurs have the luxury of having another top 3 type player on the roster to ameliorate for the loss of a star player.

But in any case, in a series against an elite team, the Thunder are better with Durant. The players don't know their roles as well and they curiously don't defend as well when he's in there, but against elite teams in a 7 game series, they're better with KD.

ftfy - m i doing it right?

I thought Durant was the Thinder's best player although it was a bit of a toss up that final year.

If you ask all NBA head coaches and all NBA GMs this question: "When facing the Warriors, if you had the power to force one player to sit, whom would you take out of the game?" I'm willing to bet that over 75% of all coaches and GMs would choose to take out Curry.

rcontador · Post #17 » by **rcontador** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:41 am

xfactor wrote:
rcontador wrote:Every time he sits out they switch back into 2016 Warriors god mode. He comes back and they still win, but it's clunky, and upsets come easier. They'll win the title with or without him, because they have 10x the talent of anybody else... but it's time to call a spade a spade. He makes them worse.

Just a reminder. The 2016 'god mode' Warriors are NOT the champions.

Steph Curry was injured in the 2016 playoffs.

MoMan24 · Post #18 » by **MoMan24** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:42 am

I don't care what anyone tells me. GSW does not need KD to get to the finals. I have seen enough at the end of the season and the game 2 blowout to know that. Now if finals LBJ shows up then they may need KD. But without KD they are in the finals with a good chance at winning it. Also with KD, Curry is never the same and things get real dicey in late game scenarios. KD is a luxury and not a necessity. To lose your most talented player and still be a true contender, just lets you know the talent edge they hold over the league. Its acutely disgusting.

Scizzup · Post #19 » by **Scizzup** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:44 am

Curry/Klay won't shoot 12/35 for 35 points a lot but when they do vs a team like Spurs/Cavs, they are probably losing that game. Unless Lebron/Kyrie also go 9/34 for 23points from the field

TheBullsDynasty · Post #20 » by **TheBullsDynasty** » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:49 am

There's one tiny detail that everyone seems to be forgetting. Thanks to Barnes last year, Cavs were able to put Lebron on Curry on both offense and defense.

Now that they have Durant, Lebron will need to defend Durant instead of Curry because Love and TT won't ve able to defend him for sure.