Higga wrote:Wall can maybe match Curry.
Curry was MVP, NBA Champion, and should have been the Finals MVP. It's pretty damn hard for me to believe Wall can match that.
Moderators: montestewart, LyricalRico, nate33
Higga wrote:Wall can maybe match Curry.
Ruzious wrote:In evaluating the finals, I think people have to realize that the finals weren't even close to the best series in the playoffs. Cleveland made the finals against an epically weak East, and playing without 2 of their top 3 players should have made the finals a joke. Quite frankly, GS didn't play anywhere near their best. So making any judgments about how to build the Wiz into a championship caliber team based on that series is a mistake, imo. You do still need quality bigs.
tontoz wrote:Game 7 of the Spurs/Clippers series was the best game i have seen in a loooong time.
fishercob wrote:Severn Hoos wrote:barelyawake wrote:A) I was really wrong about Curry (thought he would be the best sixth man, but never a star on draft night).
B) Hate LeBron still.
C) I'm more confident we will have the best backcourt in the league next year, and more confident we still need a star big.
D) The Warriors winning playing small ball in the finals was a fluke. Small ball won't win in the upcoming era (nor almost any other previous), and they didn't get there via small ball.
E) Livingston has always been a favorite of mine. I remember an argument five years ago with people saying he was done. He showed great poise and leadership.
A) Check. I didn't see him as a full time PG, but more of a combo guard - which is a dreaded label if ever there was one. Couldn't have been more wrong there.
B) Check.
C) Half a check. Curry by himself would make GS the best in the league, so I think expecting to be The Best is too lofty a goal. Best in the East? Yep. Best under 25/"young" backcourt? Yep. 2nd Best behind GSW? Yep. But Best of the Best? Can't go there yet.
D) Half a check again. I guess it depends on what you consider an "era". I could definitely see it being a primary strategy for much of the league over the next 5 years, for example. Is that an era? I don't know, but it seems like a long time in NBA years. Plus, even if/when the league figures out a counter to smallball (think the NFL & Wildcat or Read-Option), it will still be a case of playing your best players the most minutes. One thing that causes this to fluctuate is the trend of young big guys wanting to be the next Dirk/LeBron/KD, so they are playing more on the perimeter. Then you get into semantics, is KD playing PF at 6'10 really "small ball"?
E) Check. Always liked him, even though he couldn't shoot. After that injury, he's an easy guy to root for and so glad to see him reach the top.
As usual, better said than I could.
nate33 wrote:Higga wrote:Wall can maybe match Curry.
Curry was MVP, NBA Champion, and should have been the Finals MVP. It's pretty damn hard for me to believe Wall can match that.
I_Like_Dirt wrote:barelyawake wrote:
D) The Warriors winning playing small ball in the finals was a fluke. Small ball won't win in the upcoming era (nor almost any other previous), and they didn't get there via small ball.
I'm not so sure about fluke other than timing. I agree that small ball isn't going to be a thing, but versatility absolutely is. Teams need to be able to play in multiple ways, and the Spurs really pioneered this. The Spurs would often play uptempo against the Suns and beat them at their own game, but then slow it down against other teams. The Warriors are a variation on that same principle. They can play things slower if they absolutely have to; it isn't their preferred scenario, but they can play guys like Bogut, Lee, Speights, etc. and matchup against the likes of Memphis, or they can go small and force teams to match up with them. Teams still need to be able to play big, but really, they need to add as much talent as they can in any form they can, and they really shouldn't be restricting themselves to a certain type of build, and if they have a choice, the ability to be flexible is an advantage.
closg00 wrote:Detroit surprises ATL
http://www.nba.com/games/20151027/DETATL/gameinfo.html
Da Bulls beat the Cavs
http://www.nba.com/games/20151027/CLECHI/gameinfo.html
Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:Atlanta is way different without Demarre Carroll. Interesting that Kent Bazemore starts and not Tiago Splitter. Also, Lamar Patterson, who I loved at Pitt is slimmer and new to the NBA from playing in Turkey. Watch him. Bet he starts sooner than later. Muscala seems too far down. Shroeder and Teague are both starting PGs. Hawks might win 10-15 fewer games this season, because Korver will be exposed defensively and so will Millsap sans Carroll.
Kanyewest wrote:I'm not buying that Atlanta is bad yet.
closg00 wrote:Who was this Ricky Rubio who scored 28 points 14 assists last night?
Kanyewest wrote:I'm not buying that Atlanta is bad yet. Detroit also beat Utah on a back to back. Maybe Detroit is a playoff team.
tontoz wrote:KoMe shot 13 three pointers in only 29 minutes. Impressive chucking even by his standards.
LyricalRico wrote:Kanyewest wrote:I'm not buying that Atlanta is bad yet.
Oh I agree, they aren't a bad team. Too much talent to be truly bad. They'll still make the playoffs, but they aren't the 50+ win ECF contender they were last year. I've felt that all summer.