Joey Wheeler wrote:Outside wrote:Joey Wheeler wrote:Got to agree with some posts in the previous page, hard to justify keeping Durant out of the top 5, especially in favor of someone like Oladipo. It wasn't like last year, where GSW were running riot through the entire playoffs and blowing out everyone, this year Durant carried them for significant stretches - almost singlehandedly winning game 1 in Houston (which turned out to be decisive) and game 3 in Cleveland.
Just want to comment on the part I bolded above.
Game 1 vs Houston was a complete team victory. The Warriors showed themselves to be superior on both sides of the ball, and they did it using the synergistic team play they've become known for. It was not Durant carrying them single-handedly. You can say that about game 3 vs the Cavs, but not game 1 vs Houston.
In game 1 vs Houston, Durant had 37 points but only three rebounds, one assist, one block, and zero steals. Klay was 9-18 on FGs for 28 points plus 4 rebounds, 2 assists, and 2 steals, and Curry was 8-15 for 18 points, plus 6 rebounds, 8 assists, 2 steals, and a block. Draymond had only 5 points but added 9 rebounds, 9 assists, 2 steals, and 2 blocks. No one on the Warriors had a negative plus-minus, and Durant had only the third best (Draymond with his unimpressive scoring was team-high in that category). That was a team win.
The other point is that I don't see how you can call that game 1 win decisive. The series went 7 games, so I suppose any one win for the Warriors could be considered decisive, but that one doesn't qualify.
Maybe the wording was too strong but he was clearly their best player in that match and GSW would not have won it without his hyperefficient ISO scoring.
Well yeah, but that one stands out because it was (1) on the road (2) not a complete blowout and (3) a match they'd have lost without him. It's hard to credit one player too much in 30+ point blowouts.
I can't go down these "they never would've won without him" hypotheticals. You make it sound like they would take away his scoring in that game and replace it with nothing. That's not how it works. Remove Durant from that game and whoever gets his minutes almost certainly doesn't score as much, but the others would take up the slack.
Game 1 vs Houston was one of the Warriors' best performances of the season. They moved the ball and had excellent flow on offense, had only 9 turnovers, and found a nice balance between getting everyone involved (24 assists) and taking advantage of Durant in mismatches. Harden got his, Paul had a nice game, but they limited the damage from the others. They played with confidence that they were the better team. They walked onto that court with a mission to take home court advantage and show the Rockets who was the better team in what most people considered the de facto finals, and they did exactly that. They all did it, and they did it together.
That is completely different from game 3 in the finals, where Steph and Klay couldn't get it going, no one else could get it going, and they would've been sunk without Durant's scoring. In game 3 of the finals, the Warriors didn't lead at all until the third quarter, and then only by a few points, and trailed with three minutes to go. In game 1 vs Houston, the Warriors got the lead in the second quarter, were tied at the half, trailed for less than a minute to start the third, and pulled away steadily with one of their third-quarter runs to lead by 17 going into the fourth.
In the Cleveland game, Durant shot 65.2%, and Klay/Steph combined shot 25.9%. In the Houston game, Durant shot 51.9%, and Klay/Steph combined shot 51.5%. In the Cleveland game, Durant had 43 points, 13 rebounds, and 7 assists; in the Houston game, he had 37/3/1. They just aren't comparable.
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.
