DubTheVanDamage wrote:nbafan38 wrote:Steph himself said he wasn't injured and he was dominant in the blazers series when he played and dominant inparts of the thunder series so no I'm not really buying the injury excuse. I agree if Durant and/or Steph outplay Lebron and win the finals they may be considered the best at this point of Lebrons career but Lebron would always be seen as the superior all time player.
While it's true that Steph claimed not to be injured during (and right after) the series, before training camp, one of his trainers mentioned that Steph spent 3 months recuperating after the finals from his injury. It was also telling that Curry was unable to beat Love 1-on-1 in the Finals, when we've seen him routinely beat quicker big men in similar situations.
We'll likely never know the true extent of the injury (or lack thereof), but, having seen a lot of Steph live and on TV, to me at least, he didn't look close to 100%. Even when he was shooting well (which he did in spurts), he wasn't moving well.bmurph128 wrote:I provided two example in which a better player lost to an inferior player AND was outplayed, to which you have no argument. You want Steph and KD to be better than LeBron, so you're arguing this point. You've lost touch with reality a bit here. I have no doubt that Warrior fans will proclaim that LeBron has been dethroned if the Warriors win the finals, but most neutral fans will understand that it's possible to be outplayed by a better team while still being the better individual player.
Just to hop in here, I think you two are mostly talking past each other and neither of you are wrong.
For example, last year, Curry was widely viewed as having a better regular season than LeBron. Had Curry gone gangbusters in the playoffs and put up 40 points per game on great efficiency, crushing the Cavs and outplaying LeBron in the finals, the basketball world would have proclaimed Curry the best player in the world, right? We're not just talking about the Warriors winning but Curry outplaying LeBron. The narrative was in place for the passing of the crown after the regular season but the playoffs didn't 'prove it'.
Likewise, if Curry puts up better regular season stats than Kyrie but the Cavs and Warriors meet in the finals the next two years and Kyrie clearly outplays Curry, the narrative likely will be that Kyrie is the better player -- or at least when it matters.
Now, perception and reality can be different -- one season or a few playoffs may not be enough of a sample size. Likewise, team situations vary and other mitigating factors like injury and fatigue can exist. I imagine if, hypothetically speaking, Durant greatly outplays LeBron in the finals this year, any 'minutes played' arguments will fall on deaf ears, even if valid. Heck, as detailed above, I truly believe that Curry was significantly hindered during the Finals but the Warriors flat-out got beaten by the Cavs.
Well said. Thanks and I agree with you.
whatever helps ya'll sleep at night. 
