duppyy wrote: Samurai wrote:
I wouldn’t say dominated. IMO it has been equal cause of Klay missing one game and then fatigue settling game 4 for the warriors due to only one game in between game. The longer break has actually helped warriors. They were revitalized game 2 when they won and again game 5 when they won.
For raptors to win, pascal cannot let himself be treated like Harrison Barnes. If he’s shooting well and making the open 3s they win, if not there will be a game 7
I'd say that the Raptors have dominated. Dubs won game 2 by 5 points after a historically bad shooting quarter from Toronto (i.e. unlikely to happen again) and by 1 point in game 5. The Raptors average margin of victory in their 3 wins has been 12 points. And I am not surprised by this and find most people who would be "shocked" by this to be disingenuous. You can't remove a top-3 player like KD and just keep going like nothing happened. Even the most biased Raptors fan would have to admit that if they were playing without Kawhi and the Warriors had all their guys playing (even if banged up), they wouldn't be surprised if the Warriors dominated. I wouldn't be surprised at all; Kawhi is just a great player and missing his impact is huge. But injuries are part of the game. Dubs have no excuses; this is the hand they were dealt and it's next man up. If Kawhi slips in the shower and cannot play, they have zero excuses as well; its next man up. That's the nature of sports. But just because there are no excuses doesn't mean you would be surprised that a KD-less Warriors or a Kawhi-less Raptors are just not as good as if they had their big guns.
You would sweep us if we had no Kawhi.You guys dominating Portland without KD made your team look unstoppable
, the same can't be said for Kawhi-less raptors though,.
I disagree with this statement. People think we "dominated" Portland because we won 4 straight; they forget that the Dubs barely won game 2 by 2 points and game 4 was a 2-point OT win. It was actually a close and hard-fought battle, but because the Warriors managed to squeak out a few wins that could have easily gone the other way, it created this false narrative that the team was better (without KD) than they really are. The Warriors were frankly lucky, because if the brackets were different, I don't see us beating Houston in a 7-game series without KD. But people just see the word "sweep" without realizing that a few lucky bounces of the ball and the series is tied 2-2 after 4 games, making them think this team is stronger than it really is. Again, if the Raptors without Kawhi managed to get a few lucky bounces and could pull off some wins against a playoff team, that should not be extrapolated into a false narrative that a Kawhi-less Raptors could dominate a full-strength Finals team, such as the Warriors.
Many fans, including Warrior fans since I've argued this point on the GSW board, get confused by "entertaining" and "better". Without KD, the Warriors are forced to use much more motion and passing since they don't have that unstoppable 7-footer who can shoot over anyone anytime he chooses. That style of passing and constant motion can be a more enjoyable or entertaining style of basketball for some fans. But real fans should not be confused into thinking that a more entertaining style makes them better. I don't like watching the Houston "iso" Rockets play. To me, watching Harden use up 18 seconds to go one-on-one is boring. But just because I think the Harlem Globetrotters are more entertaining, I do NOT believe that the Globetrotters are "better" and could beat the Rockets in a 7-game series. I think the "ugly" Rockets would utterly dominate the "entertaining" Globetrotters. Some may similarly find the Warriors more entertaining to watch without KD, but to me there is absolutely no question that they are far better with him. I picked the Warriors to win in 6 if they had everyone playing and the Raptors had everyone playing. I think the Raptors win if the Warriors are not healthy; that's not rocket science.