'17-'18 POY discussion

[dhsilv2]

I thought Green played good defense in the playoffs, but his plus minus in the Houston series being good has more to do with playing heavier minutes in the 2nd and 3rd quarters than it does his own performance. Dray plays both with GS bench units and in the 3rd period where GS makes most of their runs, and has bad bigmen behind him. Thats the perfect recipe for good advanced on/offs.

Really beyond good team defense he did not have a good series though. Shooting, passing and especially rebounding all were areas Dray underperformed. Do I think Dray hurt his team? No. I also think they don't win without him. But he did not play to the level that some people on this board think he is.

Nobody would use on/off in a series of 7 games where both player play 40+ seriously, but your case against green doesn't make much sense. Houston ran a 7 man lineup, so there's really no "bench" to play against per say. If dray is on and kd is off in the 3rd when the games were won by the warriors, that would be a note in favor of green's impact and more to the point a sign that KD's impact is being overstated especially by those favoring looking at just his scoring.

[pelifan]

I thought Green played good defense in the playoffs, but his plus minus in the Houston series being good has more to do with playing heavier minutes in the 2nd and 3rd quarters than it does his own performance. Dray plays both with GS bench units and in the 3rd period where GS makes most of their runs, and has bad bigmen behind him. Thats the perfect recipe for good advanced on/offs.

Really beyond good team defense he did not have a good series though. Shooting, passing and especially rebounding all were areas Dray underperformed. Do I think Dray hurt his team? No. I also think they don't win without him. But he did not play to the level that some people on this board think he is.

Nobody would use on/off in a series of 7 games where both player play 40+ seriously, but your case against green doesn't make much sense. Houston ran a 7 man lineup, so there's really no "bench" to play against per say. If dray is on and kd is off in the 3rd when the games were won by the warriors, that would be a note in favor of green's impact and more to the point a sign that KD's impact is being overstated especially by those favoring looking at just his scoring.

Im not making a case against Green. Just stating the facts. My point is Dray was often on the floor when the starting lineups weren't out there. Just Klay and Dray for GS and a combo of players on Houston that replace Harden and Houstons better defensive players. KD also wasn't off in the 3rd when the Warriors made some of their runs, he just wasn't touching the ball as much.

[dhsilv2]

I thought Green played good defense in the playoffs, but his plus minus in the Houston series being good has more to do with playing heavier minutes in the 2nd and 3rd quarters than it does his own performance. Dray plays both with GS bench units and in the 3rd period where GS makes most of their runs, and has bad bigmen behind him. Thats the perfect recipe for good advanced on/offs.

Really beyond good team defense he did not have a good series though. Shooting, passing and especially rebounding all were areas Dray underperformed. Do I think Dray hurt his team? No. I also think they don't win without him. But he did not play to the level that some people on this board think he is.

Nobody would use on/off in a series of 7 games where both player play 40+ seriously, but your case against green doesn't make much sense. Houston ran a 7 man lineup, so there's really no "bench" to play against per say. If dray is on and kd is off in the 3rd when the games were won by the warriors, that would be a note in favor of green's impact and more to the point a sign that KD's impact is being overstated especially by those favoring looking at just his scoring.

Im not making a case against Green. Just stating the facts. My point is Dray was often on the floor when the starting lineups weren't out there. Just Klay and Dray for GS and a combo of players on Houston that replace Harden and Houstons better defensive players. KD also wasn't off in the 3rd when the Warriors made some of their runs, he just wasn't touching the ball as much.

Well again the rockets ran a 7 man rotation, so they never went to less than 3 starters on the floor and the rockets until paul went down were rather good with harden resting imo (I haven't looked at stats). As for the 3rd if KD wasn't touching the ball, well that's what those of us who are more critical of him would say makes our point. It was best when others were making plays. Now again usin these stats doesn't tell enough because of sample size. We can also look at dray on and KD off vs KD on and dray off. That is even more favorable for Dray (but again it's a tiny sample), and it paints a much different picture of defensive value vs offensive value, but again it's too small to even spend time discussing with reasonable minds. People who claim 30 ppg on 60% ts is enough to show KD had more impact just on offense than any defensive player in history...well if they want "stats" I can come up with them.

[ztejas]

Nobody would use on/off in a series of 7 games where both player play 40+ seriously, but your case against green doesn't make much sense. Houston ran a 7 man lineup, so there's really no "bench" to play against per say. If dray is on and kd is off in the 3rd when the games were won by the warriors, that would be a note in favor of green's impact and more to the point a sign that KD's impact is being overstated especially by those favoring looking at just his scoring.

Im not making a case against Green. Just stating the facts. My point is Dray was often on the floor when the starting lineups weren't out there. Just Klay and Dray for GS and a combo of players on Houston that replace Harden and Houstons better defensive players. KD also wasn't off in the 3rd when the Warriors made some of their runs, he just wasn't touching the ball as much.

Well again the rockets ran a 7 man rotation, so they never went to less than 3 starters on the floor and the rockets until paul went down were rather good with harden resting imo (I haven't looked at stats). As for the 3rd if KD wasn't touching the ball, well that's what those of us who are more critical of him would say makes our point. It was best when others were making plays. Now again usin these stats doesn't tell enough because of sample size. We can also look at dray on and KD off vs KD on and dray off. That is even more favorable for Dray (but again it's a tiny sample), and it paints a much different picture of defensive value vs offensive value, but again it's too small to even spend time discussing with reasonable minds. People who claim 30 ppg on 60% ts is enough to show KD had more impact just on offense than any defensive player in history...well if they want "stats" I can come up with them.

I shouldn't have said that because after giving it more thought it obviously isn't true.

However, within the context of this series I think Durant's scoring was more irreplaceable than Draymond's defense. I also don't think Draymond was some world beater on defense that series, especially with how they struggled to handle Capela at times.

There were games with stretches where Curry, Klay and Draymond's scoring was close to non existent. I don't think they pull 30 points out of thin air just from moving the ball around a little bit more. For the series, Durant isoed at something close to a 120 ORTG. I don't care how much they pass, the Warriors don't sniff that if Curry and Klay are getting mugged and not hitting jumpers.

This also isn't the Cavs they were playing. The Rockets play passing lanes probably better than any team in the league, to where it took the Warriors 5 games to find a consistent identity on O. Is Durant partially to blame for that? Of course. There are a lot of things he could have picked up on earlier than he did. But is it understandable what Durant was trying to do at times with how little scoring they were getting from other players? Absolutely it is.

I'm willing to debate whether Dray's defense or KD's scoring was more important in that series, but I am not going to admit that Draymond was somehow a plus offensive player. He was straight up bad.

[dhsilv2]

Im not making a case against Green. Just stating the facts. My point is Dray was often on the floor when the starting lineups weren't out there. Just Klay and Dray for GS and a combo of players on Houston that replace Harden and Houstons better defensive players. KD also wasn't off in the 3rd when the Warriors made some of their runs, he just wasn't touching the ball as much.

Well again the rockets ran a 7 man rotation, so they never went to less than 3 starters on the floor and the rockets until paul went down were rather good with harden resting imo (I haven't looked at stats). As for the 3rd if KD wasn't touching the ball, well that's what those of us who are more critical of him would say makes our point. It was best when others were making plays. Now again usin these stats doesn't tell enough because of sample size. We can also look at dray on and KD off vs KD on and dray off. That is even more favorable for Dray (but again it's a tiny sample), and it paints a much different picture of defensive value vs offensive value, but again it's too small to even spend time discussing with reasonable minds. People who claim 30 ppg on 60% ts is enough to show KD had more impact just on offense than any defensive player in history...well if they want "stats" I can come up with them.

I shouldn't have said that because after giving it more thought it obviously isn't true.

However, within the context of this series I think Durant's scoring was more irreplaceable than Draymond's defense. I also don't think Draymond was some world beater on defense that series, especially with how they struggled to handle Capela at times.

There were games with stretches where Curry, Klay and Draymond's scoring was close to non existent. I don't think they pull 30 points out of thin air just from moving the ball around a little bit more. For the series, Durant isoed at something close to a 120 ORTG. I don't care how much they pass, the Warriors don't sniff that if Curry and Klay are getting mugged and not hitting jumpers.

This also isn't the Cavs they were playing. The Rockets play passing lanes probably better than any team in the league, to where it took the Warriors 5 games to find a consistent identity on O. Is Durant partially to blame for that? Of course. There are a lot of things he could have picked up on earlier than he did. But is it understandable what Durant was trying to do at times with how little scoring they were getting from other players? Absolutely it is.

I'm willing to debate whether Dray's defense or KD's scoring was more important in that series, but I am not going to admit that Draymond was somehow a plus offensive player. He was straight up bad.

Why is capella getting points an issue for Dray? Just because they're both "centers" doesn't mean dray's focus is on "his man". That isn't how the warriors have really ever played defense.

The rockets had a offensive rating of 114.7 on the season. They had an offensive rating of 104.9 against the warriors. I'm not really sure who you're giving (the bulk) credit for that defense if it isn't Green.

As for Dray's offense, you don't value passing and think scoring considerably is more valuable. We will have to agree to disagree on that.

[ztejas]

Well again the rockets ran a 7 man rotation, so they never went to less than 3 starters on the floor and the rockets until paul went down were rather good with harden resting imo (I haven't looked at stats). As for the 3rd if KD wasn't touching the ball, well that's what those of us who are more critical of him would say makes our point. It was best when others were making plays. Now again usin these stats doesn't tell enough because of sample size. We can also look at dray on and KD off vs KD on and dray off. That is even more favorable for Dray (but again it's a tiny sample), and it paints a much different picture of defensive value vs offensive value, but again it's too small to even spend time discussing with reasonable minds. People who claim 30 ppg on 60% ts is enough to show KD had more impact just on offense than any defensive player in history...well if they want "stats" I can come up with them.

I shouldn't have said that because after giving it more thought it obviously isn't true.

However, within the context of this series I think Durant's scoring was more irreplaceable than Draymond's defense. I also don't think Draymond was some world beater on defense that series, especially with how they struggled to handle Capela at times.

There were games with stretches where Curry, Klay and Draymond's scoring was close to non existent. I don't think they pull 30 points out of thin air just from moving the ball around a little bit more. For the series, Durant isoed at something close to a 120 ORTG. I don't care how much they pass, the Warriors don't sniff that if Curry and Klay are getting mugged and not hitting jumpers.

This also isn't the Cavs they were playing. The Rockets play passing lanes probably better than any team in the league, to where it took the Warriors 5 games to find a consistent identity on O. Is Durant partially to blame for that? Of course. There are a lot of things he could have picked up on earlier than he did. But is it understandable what Durant was trying to do at times with how little scoring they were getting from other players? Absolutely it is.

I'm willing to debate whether Dray's defense or KD's scoring was more important in that series, but I am not going to admit that Draymond was somehow a plus offensive player. He was straight up bad.

Why is capella getting points an issue for Dray? Just because they're both "centers" doesn't mean dray's focus is on "his man". That isn't how the warriors have really ever played defense.

The rockets had a offensive rating of 114.7 on the season. They had an offensive rating of 104.9 against the warriors. I'm not really sure who you're giving (the bulk) credit for that defense if it isn't Green.

As for Dray's offense, you don't value passing and think scoring considerably is more valuable. We will have to agree to disagree on that.

I value passing a lot less when you're turning the ball over 4 times for every 7 assists you get, especially when you aren't even scoring in double digits. It's inexcusable to turn the ball over that much.

And I would bet if you take out the 92 and 86 point games that Chris Paul didn't play in Houston's ORTG is a lot higher than 105.

[dhsilv2]

I shouldn't have said that because after giving it more thought it obviously isn't true.

However, within the context of this series I think Durant's scoring was more irreplaceable than Draymond's defense. I also don't think Draymond was some world beater on defense that series, especially with how they struggled to handle Capela at times.

There were games with stretches where Curry, Klay and Draymond's scoring was close to non existent. I don't think they pull 30 points out of thin air just from moving the ball around a little bit more. For the series, Durant isoed at something close to a 120 ORTG. I don't care how much they pass, the Warriors don't sniff that if Curry and Klay are getting mugged and not hitting jumpers.

This also isn't the Cavs they were playing. The Rockets play passing lanes probably better than any team in the league, to where it took the Warriors 5 games to find a consistent identity on O. Is Durant partially to blame for that? Of course. There are a lot of things he could have picked up on earlier than he did. But is it understandable what Durant was trying to do at times with how little scoring they were getting from other players? Absolutely it is.

I'm willing to debate whether Dray's defense or KD's scoring was more important in that series, but I am not going to admit that Draymond was somehow a plus offensive player. He was straight up bad.

Why is capella getting points an issue for Dray? Just because they're both "centers" doesn't mean dray's focus is on "his man". That isn't how the warriors have really ever played defense.

The rockets had a offensive rating of 114.7 on the season. They had an offensive rating of 104.9 against the warriors. I'm not really sure who you're giving (the bulk) credit for that defense if it isn't Green.

As for Dray's offense, you don't value passing and think scoring considerably is more valuable. We will have to agree to disagree on that.

I value passing a lot less when you're turning the ball over 4 times for every 7 assists you get, especially when you aren't even scoring in double digits. It's inexcusable to turn the ball over that much.

And I would bet if you take out the 92 and 86 point games that Chris Paul didn't play in Houston's ORTG is a lot higher than 105.

I'd bet if you only looked at games CP played during the season it was a lot higher than the 114. He actually played the same percentage of games in that series as the regular season...

[ztejas]

Why is capella getting points an issue for Dray? Just because they're both "centers" doesn't mean dray's focus is on "his man". That isn't how the warriors have really ever played defense.

The rockets had a offensive rating of 114.7 on the season. They had an offensive rating of 104.9 against the warriors. I'm not really sure who you're giving (the bulk) credit for that defense if it isn't Green.

As for Dray's offense, you don't value passing and think scoring considerably is more valuable. We will have to agree to disagree on that.

I value passing a lot less when you're turning the ball over 4 times for every 7 assists you get, especially when you aren't even scoring in double digits. It's inexcusable to turn the ball over that much.

And I would bet if you take out the 92 and 86 point games that Chris Paul didn't play in Houston's ORTG is a lot higher than 105.

I'd bet if you only looked at games CP played during the season it was a lot higher than the 114. He actually played the same percentage of games in that series as the regular season...

Okay I'm not sure why you're comparing the regular season to the playoffs in the first place. Pretty sure Houston wasn't playing Golden State in a playoff atmosphere every game in the regular season. This isn't the Phoenix Suns in March.

[dhsilv2]

I value passing a lot less when you're turning the ball over 4 times for every 7 assists you get, especially when you aren't even scoring in double digits. It's inexcusable to turn the ball over that much.

And I would bet if you take out the 92 and 86 point games that Chris Paul didn't play in Houston's ORTG is a lot higher than 105.

I'd bet if you only looked at games CP played during the season it was a lot higher than the 114. He actually played the same percentage of games in that series as the regular season...

Okay I'm not sure why you're comparing the regular season to the playoffs in the first place. Pretty sure Houston wasn't playing Golden State in a playoff atmosphere every game in the regular season. This isn't the Phoenix Suns in March.

Big sample > small sample. The rockets were an all time great offense and the warriors held them down. They won on defense.

[Doctor MJ]

I think playmaker will do. It's not like anyone looks at that word and thinks it describes someone like Draymond Green. We're learning now that you need multiple playmakers on the floor that can drive and kick to eachother and either score or churn the defense enough that one of the play finishers can score.

I'm specifically talking about a role that the Warriors don't emphasize and which puts major emphasis on scoring threat.

But I genuinely don't see why the term playmaker doesn't fit the bill for what you're getting at. I'd consider a non-scoring threat like a Draymond or a Rondo a "facilitator". But to me a playmaker is someone who either makes a play for himself (i.e. score) or for someone else.

I think I misread your post, so apologies for the confusion. I see your point.

I’ve never liked the term “playmaker” associated with score-first players because to me the term implies an ability to make plays without prioritizing their own scoring above the team and yet people have come to use it to mean any ball hog who also gets assists.

I would concede though that based on the common parlance that I hate, it’s a reasonable term for what I’m describing.




Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[Heej]

I'm specifically talking about a role that the Warriors don't emphasize and which puts major emphasis on scoring threat.

But I genuinely don't see why the term playmaker doesn't fit the bill for what you're getting at. I'd consider a non-scoring threat like a Draymond or a Rondo a "facilitator". But to me a playmaker is someone who either makes a play for himself (i.e. score) or for someone else.

I think I misread your post, so apologies for the confusion. I see your point.

I’ve never liked the term “playmaker” associated with score-first players because to me the term implies an ability to make plays without prioritizing their own scoring above the team and yet people have come to use it to mean any ball hog who also gets assists.

I would concede though that based on the common parlance that I hate, it’s a reasonable term for what I’m describing.




Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

Oh believe me, the problem you have with the nuance of the term is one that I had as well when I was coming up with an answer to your question. But I realized that times change, and in an earlier era it was lionized to be able to look for others and then look for yourself due to the way PNR was defended before. Times are different now and it's optimal to have a player that can score for themselves AND THEN be willing and capable to look for others due to the switch heavy isolation play at the upper echelons. To me a playmaker is always what you want on the floor, and the meaning of what that term encompasses has changed over time.

[Doctor MJ]

But I genuinely don't see why the term playmaker doesn't fit the bill for what you're getting at. I'd consider a non-scoring threat like a Draymond or a Rondo a "facilitator". But to me a playmaker is someone who either makes a play for himself (i.e. score) or for someone else.

I think I misread your post, so apologies for the confusion. I see your point.

I’ve never liked the term “playmaker” associated with score-first players because to me the term implies an ability to make plays without prioritizing their own scoring above the team and yet people have come to use it to mean any ball hog who also gets assists.

I would concede though that based on the common parlance that I hate, it’s a reasonable term for what I’m describing.




Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

Oh believe me, the problem you have with the nuance of the term is one that I had as well when I was coming up with an answer to your question. But I realized that times change, and in an earlier era it was lionized to be able to look for others and then look for yourself due to the way PNR was defended before. Times are different now and it's optimal to have a player that can score for themselves AND THEN be willing and capable to look for others due to the switch heavy isolation play at the upper echelons. To me a playmaker is always what you want on the floor, and the meaning of what that term encompasses has changed over time.

Well said Heej. It probably is most appropriate to use that term in all its infamy.

[Doctor MJ]

Voting thread is open!

[Dupp]

Im curious about the voters who are voting Lebron for player of the year but harden for offensive player of the year... I guess I don’t fully get the logic here. I know Lebron actually played some good defense in the playoffs but his main dominance was on the offensive end.


So just wondering if lebrons playoffs outweigh harden so regular season advantage as a whole, y doesn’t his playoff offense outweigh hardens regular season offense? This vote would have to be incredibly close for this to make sense to me.

I guess I’m of the opinion that whoever of the two is player of the year is also offensive player of the year. Each to their own I guess.

[Texas Chuck]

Im curious about the voters who are voting Lebron for player of the year but harden for offensive player of the year... I guess I don’t fully get the logic here. I know Lebron actually played some good defense in the playoffs but his main dominance was on the offensive end.


So just wondering if lebrons playoffs outweigh harden so regular season advantage as a whole, y doesn’t his playoff offense outweigh hardens regular season offense? This vote would have to be incredibly close for this to make sense to me.

I guess I’m of the opinion that whoever of the two is player of the year is also offensive player of the year. Each to their own I guess.

I don't know if you have been following the discussion on the PC board for long, but there is a vocal group here who feel(incorrectly imo) that Lebron's offensive style caps the ceiling on his teams and thus would probably take Harden over him stylistically while pretty much being forced to acknowledge that Lebron is still the best player in the world.

Or some may just want to throw Harden a bone after that ridiculous RS.

Or some are simply voting Lebron for both.

[PaulieWal]

Im curious about the voters who are voting Lebron for player of the year but harden for offensive player of the year... I guess I don’t fully get the logic here. I know Lebron actually played some good defense in the playoffs but his main dominance was on the offensive end.


So just wondering if lebrons playoffs outweigh harden so regular season advantage as a whole, y doesn’t his playoff offense outweigh hardens regular season offense? This vote would have to be incredibly close for this to make sense to me.

I guess I’m of the opinion that whoever of the two is player of the year is also offensive player of the year. Each to their own I guess.

I don't know if you have been following the discussion on the PC board for long, but there is a vocal group here who feel(incorrectly imo) that Lebron's offensive style caps the ceiling on his teams and thus would probably take Harden over him stylistically while pretty much being forced to acknowledge that Lebron is still the best player in the world.

Or some may just want to throw Harden a bone after that ridiculous RS.

Or some are simply voting Lebron for both.

I think you are a bit off actually. The posters who use "LeBron ball" derogatorily are usually not Harden guys either since Harden is actually what LeBron ball is where Harden loves to iso or pass the ball. LeBron ball is actually more about driving and kicking and not all just iso or 3.

The anti-LeBron ball guys are usually Curry guys from what I have noticed.

[dhsilv2]

Im curious about the voters who are voting Lebron for player of the year but harden for offensive player of the year... I guess I don’t fully get the logic here. I know Lebron actually played some good defense in the playoffs but his main dominance was on the offensive end.


So just wondering if lebrons playoffs outweigh harden so regular season advantage as a whole, y doesn’t his playoff offense outweigh hardens regular season offense? This vote would have to be incredibly close for this to make sense to me.

I guess I’m of the opinion that whoever of the two is player of the year is also offensive player of the year. Each to their own I guess.

A lot of people (already some good responses) really feel that despite RPM or RAPM that Harden was still just an awful defender despite a lot of data showing he wasn't worse than lebron. I'm sure that's a factor here as well.

[Dupp]

Im curious about the voters who are voting Lebron for player of the year but harden for offensive player of the year... I guess I don’t fully get the logic here. I know Lebron actually played some good defense in the playoffs but his main dominance was on the offensive end.


So just wondering if lebrons playoffs outweigh harden so regular season advantage as a whole, y doesn’t his playoff offense outweigh hardens regular season offense? This vote would have to be incredibly close for this to make sense to me.

I guess I’m of the opinion that whoever of the two is player of the year is also offensive player of the year. Each to their own I guess.

I don't know if you have been following the discussion on the PC board for long, but there is a vocal group here who feel(incorrectly imo) that Lebron's offensive style caps the ceiling on his teams and thus would probably take Harden over him stylistically while pretty much being forced to acknowledge that Lebron is still the best player in the world.

Or some may just want to throw Harden a bone after that ridiculous RS.

Or some are simply voting Lebron for both.

To your first and last point, Yeah I read the thread regularly and realise probably most people are voting Lebron for both.

As for the rest, I would have thought the group that thinks lebrons offensive style capped his teams offense why would they be voting for him for player of the year? I just think lebrons defense was horrid in the regular season and pretty good in the post season, but not special. To put a random number on it I’d say his offense was 90% of his impact on the year.

[Doctor MJ]

So, I'm really debating LeBron vs Harden in my head. I'll say up front that there's a rather loud voice in my own head that thinks I'm crazy for even considering voting for Harden, when I consider LeBron the clearly superior basketball player.

But I think LeBron the lionization of his "me against the world" season is just ruined for me because he played a part in every bit of damage that reduced the team from its peak to where it is now, as well as some of the things they'll be weighed down with in the years to come.

I also have to be honest and say that I found myself hung up on the broken hand thing. Doesn't seem like a rational thing to be the deciding factor, but it's LeBron's year in a damn nutshell. And it may not have mattered for who won the series, but every other Warrior opponent lost in Game 1 too. They all rallied to perform better and take a game off the Warriors...and that may not have happened if, say, their star player threw a tantrum and injured himself.

It may not have made a difference of course...but LeBron's the one who displayed it. How am I supposed to ignore it when you choose to have it be the last thing I see before the season ends? And am I really supposed to? LeBron's a smart dude, he is not artless in the slightest. The message he sent with the cast was essentially:

So...I f'd up. I'm such a bad ass I'm still the best in the world, but yeah, I f'd up.

It's actually charming, gives an impression of "being the ultimate competitor", and indicates another level of physical impressiveness.

But it also hurt his team, and his tantrum and the aftermath was known by his teammates. Those same teammates he through under the bus for being dolts afterward. Those same guys who only just got there because LeBron tanked to get other guys traded a hot minute ago. And that previous iteration happening because his co-star decided he needed to get out.

And literally all of this has happened in the past 12 months. Chickens big and small came to roost, and the end result is this half beautiful, half ugly season.

And so, the question then: Does it matter that LeBron's poor mood and impulse control resulted in Cleveland being the Warriors easiest out in this years playoffs?

If the answer to that for you is "No", I totally get that. I find myself stuck on in though.

[Dupp]

In the end though Lebron probably only came up short one game of the cavs peak season. Keeping Kyrie, less drama etc best case scenario cavs lose 4-1 anyway.

You could say regular season wins and I’d probably add 5 as a absolute maximum. Lebrons “lesser” load in the reg season is what allows him to make a long post season run.

This team should t have beaten Indiana or Boston imo but that’s AFTER all of the drama. Before yeah probably.