Rodwilliams wrote: OriginalRed wrote:
I always find it odd when people are so adamant that the Cavs would have won if healthy...
...because the healthy Cavs needed a lot of favorable circumstances to BARELY squeak by essentially the same roster the next year.
It doesn't really make much sense to me either.
It took a near game winning Kyrie Irving three and Draymond suspension to barely win that series for the Cavs but I'm supposed to believe the year before they would have easily beat the Warriors with the same roster? It's not like Golden State in 2016 was playing way better in the Finals.
In 15 the series somehow went six games with Delly being Lebron 2nd best player.
You can spin it how you want but that series didn’t come down to a Kyrie Irving three. It came down to the Warriors being up 3-1 and losing 3 games in a row. The Cavs should’ve never been in a situation where they have a chance to make a game winning shot in game 7 because no team that has been down 3-1 in the Finals has ever came back before. Draymond played game 6 and 7.
Who is the one spinning here?
In 2016, the Cavs were healthy. The Warriors had injuries. Maybe it was due to his previous injury, or maybe he choked, but either way you slice it Curry had the worst playoff series of his career. Draymond got suspended for a game. Harrison Barnes went 5-31 on wide open shots over the course of Games 5-7. LeBron and Kyrie played out of their minds...
...all of that broke in the Cavs' favor, and they still won by the slimmest of margins. No spin-job changes that fact.
Would the Cavs have won in 2015 had they been healthy? Maybe?
That said, I have no idea how anyone can look at what happened in 2016 and conclude that a fully healthy Cavs team the year before would have decisively beaten the Warriors.