NBA 2020-2021 - v. 2021 Finals: Milwaukee and Giannis rule the basketball world

[Samsara]

The fight between KAT and Embiid...don’t understand how it gets to that point for some players and then Embiid seemed so happy and satisfied afterwards as if he wanted that.

They have never liked one another - at all. Last night was all about the punk ass bully shit from Embiid. They were jawing, as all competitive stars do when matched up. But then after the refs turned their backs and ran up court, Embiid then pushed KAT (twice) in the face (more like an open-handed push-punch), and then KAT retaliated, leading to the whole thing.

Here's my issue -- I don't begrudge KAT standing up for himself. Embiid is a dirty player (YES, HE. IS.), who likes to run his mouth, and he very purposefully baited KAT. The problem I have is the WAY Towns responded. He should have went toe-to-toe, but kept his arms down, and just jawed right in that ugly bastard's face. And let Embiid pick his hands up. Instead, KAT did what he did. And now, both will probably be suspended, and the Wolves need KAT way more than the Sixers need the ass clown Embiid.

It continued on social media all night, with Embiid calling Towns a "pussy" and Towns responding in-kind.

Again -- I'm not mad that Towns responded. I'm mad that he responded like a 16 year old on the blacktop in a pick-up game, instead of the focal point and leader of an NBA franchise. Jordan never backed down to anyone. He got in everyone's face if they tried to intimidate. But he never raised his hands. Towns made a mistake, even if he was in the right in responding.

Embiid is just a dirty player and an asshole. And I wish the league would do something about him. At least when leaving the court, Embiid's face was bloody after Towns pounded him. While KAT had to deal with Embiid's Aussie sidekick putting him in a sleeper hold. LOL.

So, so stupid. And now my team is probably losing its only star player for at least a couple of games. I heard the league will address it today or tomorrow. Wolves next game is at Washington on Saturday.

[Lonk]

I just realized something. For the past few years I’ve been saying Draymond Green would be exposed without the help of the warriors core players (curry and Thompson). He’s been pounding his chest and inflating his ego thinking he is so valuable (which for the warriors play, he was).

The next 3 months are either going to expose him aa system player that can’t do anything by himself, or a good player that will make things happen no matter what.

[King Postwhore]

Well, you take away the top 3 players on a team and of course one guy can't hold the fort.  That's obvious. 

[Lonk]

Is not a matter of him winning games or keeping the team afloat, but more of putting up the same numbers (10-7-7) with the similar efficiency.

[MinistroRaven]

WARRIORS STARTERS:

November 2, 2018 vs November 2, 2019

Curry, Thompson, Durant, Green, Jones

Bowman, Poole, Robinson III, Paschall, Cayley-Stein.

[Azyiu]

Is not a matter of him winning games or keeping the team afloat, but more of putting up the same numbers (10-7-7) with the similar efficiency.

I don't think D-Green is being exposed, and IMHO he has been being himself most of the time. I mean, when you have no talents around you, there is only so much you can accomplish. It is like you couldn't expect Rodman to lead the 90's Bulls, if both MJ, Pippen were out, and perhaps with only a few G-League level talents

[Samsara]

The Bucks are who I thought they were. 

Wolves hung in for the first half. But without KAT, they were outgunned. I'd like to think with KAT and a solid 25/15/5 effort, we'd have that game down to the wire. But good game by the Bucks. Wolves without KAT is a game the Bucks should win...for now.

[Azyiu]

Speaking of the Bucks, Kawhi Leonard will be sitting out the game vs the Bucks in LA for "load management" reasons. WTF?! This is so early into the season and he has already been sitting out at least twice already?! 

[jingle.boy]

It worked last year, didn't it?

[King Postwhore]

Very happy with the C's start. Man 2 years ago I was over the hill getting Kyrie.  I never knew one person, with so much talent could be so toxic.

[Azyiu]

It worked last year, didn't it?

All jokes aside, I understand the Clippers have been investing a lot of money into Kawhi, yet he is supposedly fully healthy now. I would hate to be those fans who pay good money in hope of seeing him play in person, only to find out he is sitting out not due to any real injury. 

[TAC]

Very happy with the C's start. Man 2 years ago I was over the hill getting Kyrie.  I never knew one person, with so much talent could be so toxic.

You have to be happy with the C's start, but like the Pats, their schedule has been putrid. They're 1-1 against Philly/Milwaukee.

[King Postwhore]

It's like you think I think they can win it all.

Kyrie with all his talent was poison.  I turned so many games off, didn't bother checking in.

Now, I'm checking in, watching games. I don't know what to expect but I'm enjoying it more.

[TAC]

It's like you think I think they can win it all.

No sah. I never said that. I didn't even think that. I'm just saying their schedule has been tit. They've basically played to expectations to this point.


But hell yes, they are way more likeable.

[jingle.boy]

It worked last year, didn't it?

All jokes aside, I understand the Clippers have been investing a lot of money into Kawhi, yet he is supposedly fully healthy now. I would hate to be those fans who pay good money in hope of seeing him play in person, only to find out he is sitting out not due to any real injury. 

I think this is the smarter NBA though. It's a grind to play 82 games, then expect a full playoff run at peak performance. I'm frankly surprised more teams aren't resting their A players more often.

[King Postwhore]

Expectations?  5-1?  Settle down.  With Irving they were going nowhere.   He sours everybody around him. 

I can't believe I'm typing this but watching last year I know that talent,  has mental issues and never take any team to the promised land as the #1.

[Azyiu]

I think this is the smarter NBA though. It's a grind to play 82 games, then expect a full playoff run at peak performance. I'm frankly surprised more teams aren't resting their A players more often.

This early into the season? The Clippers haven't even played 10 full games yet. I understand it is a long season, but players can play less minutes instead of sitting out completely. I think I wouldn't feel that same way if it is after the ASG or in late March or something; but this early into the season? I would feel cheated if I were a fan. Years ago that happened to me back in Phoenix. I was excited to go see T-Mac, and only to find out he would be resting when I got to my seat (remember that was the early 2000's and there were no smart phones like the kind we are using now)... the Magic only come into town once a season, and he was one of my fav players at the time.   

[jingle.boy]

He missed 20 games for load mgmt last year. Wouldn't be surprised if it's 12-15 this year, which is 3-4 out of every 20 games. So yeah ... this early into the season doesn't surprise me at all.

[Samsara]

re: C's - much better vibe it seems (from a distance). There's a calmness to things. It's showing on the court. Tatum has taken a step, Hayward looks comfortable, etc. Kemba's personality likely has a lot to do with it. Kyrie was...too much. As the Nets are discovering. Although I think the Nets will be fine. Kyrie is still a head case, but he's home, and I think that has settled him (not to mention the big contract).

re: Kawhi - this has gotten ridiculous. The problem is, the league won't enforce the rule they put in place. Clearly, Kawhi is fine. And here's the kicker. While they have a back to back today and tomorrow (both at home), they have THREE DAYS OFF after that. You're telling me Kawhi can't play 68 minutes over two consecutive nights? REALLY?! It's absolutely stupid. As much as I respect the quiet manner he conducts himself in, and obviously the all-world talent, it IS him driving this, not the team. And that's just wrong.

I know guys want to do everything they can do to sustain themselves. I get it. The longer they are in the league, and performing at a top level, the longer and more they get paid. It is all money driven. It always is. The science backs the "rest." Look at Lebron. He has played 17 seasons of regular season games and TWO MORE seasons of games worth of playoff basketball. And he's still at the top of his offensive game (although his defense is nowhere near what it once was). He's going to end up playing 20 years in the league. You're going to see that a ton more as time goes on.

Give me guys like Towns, Giannis, guys who stick a middle finger to "load management" and just play. Maybe their minutes have come down a bit, but they PLAY. And take pride in playing. As incredible as Kawhi is, and we know he's clutch, this looks bad, and sets a really bad example. I think the league needs to step in and fine the Clippers. BIG time fine. Ballmer may be a billionaire, but if the league fines him 10 million every time Kawhi does "load mgmt" it'll stop the trend really quickly.

Wolves in Memphis tonight. They have no point guards.  I should go suit up. KAT comes back though, my pups are going to tame the Grizz.

[jingle.boy]

I disagree on the load management topic.  With everything you've said.  I'll tell you this - not one single Canadian cares that he missed the 20 games he did.  And even if the Raps hadn't gotten the trophy, I doubt anyone would make as big of a stink as you're making.  Yes it's about money.  And what's the best way for players to get paid - excel in the regular season??  Nope... it's the Larry OB.  Full stop.  That's what the Clippers are playing for now - not 50 or 60 win seasons.  The trophy.  HOW they do it is up to them, not the fans.

If/when Giannis and Towns get a big injury, we'll see how much they stick it to load management.  If/when they fade down the stretch, we'll see how much they (or the team) stick it to load management.

Winning is about the BIG picture... not individual games.

[Samsara]

I disagree on the load management topic.  With everything you've said.  I'll tell you this - not one single Canadian cares that he missed the 20 games he did.  And even if the Raps hadn't gotten the trophy, I doubt anyone would make as big of a stink as you're making.  Yes it's about money.  And what's the best way for players to get paid - excel in the regular season??  Nope... it's the Larry OB.  Full stop.  That's what the Clippers are playing for now - not 50 or 60 win seasons.  The trophy.  HOW they do it is up to them, not the fans.

If/when Giannis and Towns get a big injury, we'll see how much they stick it to load management.  If/when they fade down the stretch, we'll see how much they (or the team) stick it to load management.

Winning is about the BIG picture... not individual games.

I think you're absolutely wrong. Had the Raptors lost in the second round, the narrative would have absolutely been "with Kawhi missing as much time as he did, did that impact their chemistry on the floor? Was the time off the reason they didn't fulfill expectations?" Take it from an old sportswriter. That WOULD have been covered.

I don't necessarily think what I am saying is making a "big stink" of load management. I just simply don't like the concept, and think this particular stretch for the Clippers (back to back home games, three days off) is really sort of ridiculous that Kawhi can't play two games in two nights. Of course he can. He's choosing not to, IMO, and I think that's selfish.

Yes, you play for the LOB trophy. Absolutely. But so did the thousands of players who came before him, who averaged 40 minutes a night and never missed a game. The players want to "expand their brand" all the time -- well, you don't do that by not playing games as a healthy scratch. What about the kids who show up to see their idols, and they see them healthy and sitting on the sidelines laughing it up? It sends a terrible message. The NBA is VERY aware of it, and that's why they sent that memo out about abusing the whole "rest" thing. But since it is a players' league, they aren't going to lay the hammer down. But they should, IMO.

And I think you and Rap fans need a dose of reality. You've won a title, absolutely BECAUSE OF Kawhi. What he did worked, saving himself for the playoffs. I get it. But you're one or two runs away from being eliminated early in the playoffs, and all the Canadians WOULD care that he missed 20 games for rest had they lost early in the playoffs. As I said, the whole narrative would have been pointed right on the whole "rest" thing with Kawhi, and people would have asked why the team traded Derozen and not advanced any further with Kawhi.

But the Raps gelled, at the right time, and Kawhi, being the superstar he is, carried them home. But one missed shot, one poor run, and the narrative is completely different. And if you're being objective (which lets face it, as a Raps fan who is glowing from a title, you're not), you know I'm right.

[jingle.boy]

Yes, you play for the LOB trophy. Absolutely. But so did the thousands of players who came before him, who averaged 40 minutes a night and never missed a game.

Surely you're not suggesting that the game couldn't/doesn't/shouldn't evolve?  As much you point to this statement, I have no doubt someone could point to dozens of examples whereby players / teams would've wished for the hindsight to pace themselves, not play while injured, resulting in teams/players that underperformed because of over-exertion.

But the Raps gelled, at the right time, and Kawhi, being the superstar he is, carried them home. But one missed shot, one poor run, and the narrative is completely different. And if you're being objective (which lets face it, as a Raps fan who is glowing from a title, you're not), you know I'm right.

I agree on a lot of what you said, but not the last part.  If things had turned out differently, the media may have made the narrative very different, much as you describe.  I know I personally (can't speak for 30M other Raps fans) I wouldn't have been terribly stuffed - Ujiri took a big - HUGE - gamble.  High risk; high reward.  He/we hit the jackpot - and it was ABSOLUTELY was just as expected/likely that he would not have.  I doubt the FANS would've been crying boo-hoo and blaming it on Kawhi's 20 missed games.  An early exit would've been just more of the same that Raps fans had basically come to expect... simply substituting #10 for #2.

Maybe I'm not being entirely objective, but as a non-Canadian, let's face it, you don't know the mood of the fan base... you know I'm right.    

I'm not trying to change your mind - clearly I'm not going to.  You'll also not change mine, so methinks we'll just have to agree to disagree on the matter.

[Samsara]

Jingle,

I love going back and forth with you. You GET IT. You don't take it personal, and know I'm not either. Good stuff here. Lemme respond.

Surely you're not suggesting that the game couldn't/doesn't/shouldn't evolve?  As much you point to this statement, I have no doubt someone could point to dozens of examples whereby players / teams would've wished for the hindsight to pace themselves, not play while injured, resulting in teams/players that underperformed because of over-exertion.

Absolutely the game is changing. Despite what I said, obviously guys from the 80s touting they averaged 43 per night, played all 82, and then another 20 games in the playoffs -- they lasted like 10-12 years.  I am all for sports science. But I also think as a society, people tend to lean on science/stats as a crutch.

I agree on a lot of what you said, but not the last part.  If things had turned out differently, the media may have made the narrative very different, much as you describe.

From my experience as a reporter, it would have been one of the first questions I asked Ujiri, Nurse, and Kawhi. I think most reporters would have led with a couple of softballs, and then they would HAVE to ask that, and it would have become the narrative. Trust me.

I know I personally (can't speak for 30M other Raps fans) I wouldn't have been terribly stuffed - Ujiri took a big - HUGE - gamble.  High risk; high reward.  He/we hit the jackpot - and it was ABSOLUTELY was just as expected/likely that he would not have.  I doubt the FANS would've been crying boo-hoo and blaming it on Kawhi's 20 missed games.  An early exit would've been just more of the same that Raps fans had basically come to expect... simply substituting #10 for #2.

Maybe I'm not being entirely objective, but as a non-Canadian, let's face it, you don't know the mood of the fan base... you know I'm right.    

Heh. Maybe. I just can't but think that MOST Canadians would have been like "why did we bother trading Derozen" had the Raps been eliminated early. It was a big risk and gamble. It worked -- it got you the ring. And overall, the Raps are in a good spot now, and while they likely won't win the title again, they've got financial flexibility. It worked to almost perfection (Kawhi staying would have been icing on the cake). I get it. But given how beloved DeRozen is, I'm not as confident that fans wouldn't have throw their hands in the air, and felt like the one Raptor who wanted to be there long term got F'd and the result was absolutely the same.

Honest to goodness, I rooted for the Raps in the finals. What a great story, and I was and am, a big fan of DeRozen. I was happy Toronto got its chip.

I'm not trying to change your mind - clearly I'm not going to.  You'll also not change mine, so methinks we'll just have to agree to disagree on the matter.

Totally, but it's a good, civil discussion with respect on both sides. A rarity in this day and age. Glad we did it. 

[jingle.boy]

I'm glad for the conversation too... and shall retort on a couple of points.

I completely agree on your first two points above.  No arguement there.  Though, I think the analytics/stats are so advanced, it's usually more than a "crutch".

Heh. Maybe. I just can't but think that MOST Canadians would have been like "why did we bother trading Derozen" had the Raps been eliminated early.

First, the Raptors were a TORONTO team for the past 25 years.  It was ONLY because of the huge success the Kawhi brought that elevated them to *Canada's* team.  I don't think that there was too much of a fan base outside of the  Toronto area until the 2nd half of last year when the fans could sense something was different.

It was a big risk and gamble. It worked -- it got you the ring. And overall, the Raps are in a good spot now, and while they likely won't win the title again, they've got financial flexibility. It worked to almost perfection (Kawhi staying would have been icing on the cake). I get it. But given how beloved DeRozen is, I'm not as confident that fans wouldn't have throw their hands in the air, and felt like the one Raptor who wanted to be there long term got F'd and the result was absolutely the same.

Believe me, the Raptors fan base was ready to lynch Ujiri when the deal was announced ... and stayed that way for a very long time.  I think the fanbase thought it was a TERRIBLE deal, and did even as the season started and for a few months in to it.  There was a decent amount of understanding that we had to try and 'sell' Toronto as a place for Kawhi, even though I still think a lot of people weren't sold on him until a few months into the season.  Up to that point, I believe it was just a courteous appreciation that was being extended - for a guy who was thought to be selfish and had only played 9 games in the prior 14 months.  When people realized that he was in a different league of skill than DDR, as well as understanding who he was as a person, then the fanbase embraced him.  Then the country embraced him.

[TAC]

Expectations?  5-1?  Settle down.  .

Huh?

I'm just saying that they are doing what they should be doing.

They are 2-1 against Toronto/Mil/Philly, winning two home games and losing the road game.
No surprises there.

They have beat the worst team in the East (the Knicks) twice and the Cavs, who also suck.

So to me, 5-1 is exactly where they should be honestly.

I'm confused with what you're saying I guess.

[King Postwhore]

I feel they will be better than last year.  Kyrie was that poisonous.   Never thought I'd say that but after seeing last year and all the drama he caused this team has a weight off their shoulders. 

[bosk1]

I just realized something. For the past few years I’ve been saying Draymond Green would be exposed without the help of the warriors core players (curry and Thompson). He’s been pounding his chest and inflating his ego thinking he is so valuable (which for the warriors play, he was).

The next 3 months are either going to expose him aa system player that can’t do anything by himself, or a good player that will make things happen no matter what.

I don't really get that sentiment.  He is a player with a specific skill set and value that he brings to the team.  In that role, I think he is one of the best.  But he absolutely has a role, and that role is specific to having the right pieces around him.  I think Azhiu has it right: 

Is not a matter of him winning games or keeping the team afloat, but more of putting up the same numbers (10-7-7) with the similar efficiency.

I don't think D-Green is being exposed, and IMHO he has been being himself most of the time. I mean, when you have no talents around you, there is only so much you can accomplish. It is like you couldn't expect Rodman to lead the 90's Bulls, if both MJ, Pippen were out, and perhaps with only a few G-League level talents

Or maybe a more current example that is closer is Patrick Beverly.  Beverly is one of the best in the NBA at what he does.  But he isn't a scorer.  He isn't one that could carry an average or bad team.  That isn't his role or his skill set.  Put him on a bad or average team, and nobody notices him.  But put him on a team with the right pieces, and he takes them to the next level because of what he is able to bring to the table.  I'm not sure putting a player on an island by himself exposes anything when that player's skill set is geared toward facilitating and amplifying great play from great players. 

[Samsara]

I just realized something. For the past few years I’ve been saying Draymond Green would be exposed without the help of the warriors core players (curry and Thompson). He’s been pounding his chest and inflating his ego thinking he is so valuable (which for the warriors play, he was).

The next 3 months are either going to expose him aa system player that can’t do anything by himself, or a good player that will make things happen no matter what.

I don't really get that sentiment.  He is a player with a specific skill set and value that he brings to the team.  In that role, I think he is one of the best.  But he absolutely has a role, and that role is specific to having the right pieces around him.  I think Azhiu has it right: 

Is not a matter of him winning games or keeping the team afloat, but more of putting up the same numbers (10-7-7) with the similar efficiency.

I don't think D-Green is being exposed, and IMHO he has been being himself most of the time. I mean, when you have no talents around you, there is only so much you can accomplish. It is like you couldn't expect Rodman to lead the 90's Bulls, if both MJ, Pippen were out, and perhaps with only a few G-League level talents

Or maybe a more current example that is closer is Patrick Beverly.  Beverly is one of the best in the NBA at what he does.  But he isn't a scorer.  He isn't one that could carry an average or bad team.  That isn't his role or his skill set.  Put him on a bad or average team, and nobody notices him.  But put him on a team with the right pieces, and he takes them to the next level because of what he is able to bring to the table.  I'm not sure putting a player on an island by himself exposes anything when that player's skill set is geared toward facilitating and amplifying great play from great players.

One of the rare times that bosk1 and I actually agree on everything. Save this post. 

But that leads me to another discussion on Green, and how it relates to "Hall of Fame" players. I've been hearing a lot of talk about who is and who isn't worthy of the Hall of Fame, brought on by Jordan's comments that Steph Curry is NOT a HOFer yet. When he said it, I didn't really think it was a big deal. Steph still has like six or seven years left, and his body of work isn't finished yet. That's how I took Jordan's comments. But most people took it as Jordan slighting Curry (which the media ran with). But it ended up starting some talk on NBA radio about Draymond Green.

You had hosts calling him a HOF player, and fans chiming in that's he's a clear HOFer. I'm sorry, but no, it's not cut and dry. Here's my argument:

For me personally, a HOF player has to be either:

1) transcendent, where he has changed the game by being dominant in a way that was never quite seen before (Wilt, MJ, Magic, etc.)
2) dominant on both ends of the floor for the majority of his career (Garnett, Duncan, etc.)
3) so overwhelmingly dominant in a specific, defined role, that it is a clear no-brainer (Rodman, Mutumbo, etc.)

I think Draymond's candidacy is obviously in #3. He's not a transcendent player, and he's not dominant on both ends of the floor. On the latter, you can argue his passing, but let's just be honest, the moment a good defender gets on him, he can't get rid of the ball fast enough. He's not dominant on the offensive end. So, back to #3...

Is Draymond's defensive presence so dominant, that it lifts him from valuable role player on a championship team, to a Hall of Famer? I'll be very honest. At first I thought no. But I have waffled. I just don't know. I think Draymond's defense is all star level, but he's more of a big annoying gnat. Can he pick up ANY guy on the floor and shut them down? I don't think so. He couldn't guard a smaller player, and he would have trouble (and has) with a guy like Embiid, Towns, Davis (but to be fair, most of the league struggles guarding those three). I honestly just don't know. What do you all think?

[jingle.boy]

All-star talent =/= HOF.  I can't fathom putting Green in the same class as Rodman/Mutumbo.

To me, HOF means you have a hand in making A) your team better than if you weren't there and/or B) other players better because of your presence/play .... regardless of the sport.  Would the Dubs have won 4/5 titles without Green?  Maybe not 4... but surely a couple.  Maybe I don't have enough exposure to his play, but he just doesn't strike me as having HOF gravitas.

[Lonk]

Or maybe a more current example that is closer is Patrick Beverly.  Beverly is one of the best in the NBA at what he does.  But he isn't a scorer.  He isn't one that could carry an average or bad team.  That isn't his role or his skill set.  Put him on a bad or average team, and nobody notices him.  But put him on a team with the right pieces, and he takes them to the next level because of what he is able to bring to the table.  I'm not sure putting a player on an island by himself exposes anything when that player's skill set is geared toward facilitating and amplifying great play from great players.

That is a good point! I was thinking more on individual stats rather than what he brings to a team beyond numbers, so you are right.

Re: HOF talk. that's where my original point came from. I had conversations with friends and coworkers about him and a few went on to say he is HoF material and could carry a team by himself, which I disagreed. But as Bosk said, he does makes the rest of his team better, and without his defense the Warriors wouldn't be as feared as they were during that 5 year stretch.

[bosk1]

Yeah, on the HOF stuff, I'm not sure.  It's subjective, and I guess I don't have strong feelings one way or the other.  If his career ended right now (which I acknowledge is a flawed way of looking at it, but it is what it is), I'd say "no," simply from the standpoint that I don't think he's done quite enough to get it.  Once the team is rebuilt, and if he can continue on the same track for a few more years, I'd say yes.  Not in terms of being able to carry a team by himself--I'm a fan, but I would strongly disagree with your friends as well on that point--but in terms of his dominant defense and running the offense in a way that makes them such a feared team.  And I think that, in a role like that, he has to sustain it longer than, say, someone like Stef.  If, hypothetically, Stef's injury turns out to be worse than expected, and he has to suddenly retire without playing another game, I think Stef eventually gets in.  His MVP awards, shattering so many different records, sheer offensive numbers and performance, and the intangibles of how [almost] universally liked he is get him there based on what he has already done.  For a player like Green, I think he has to sustain what he has done longer to get the nod.  But that's just my subjective take.

All-star talent =/= HOF.  I can't fathom putting Green in the same class as Rodman/Mutumbo.

I...don't disagree with that. 

To me, HOF means you have a hand in making A) your team better than if you weren't there and/or B) other players better because of your presence/play .... regardless of the sport.  Would the Dubs have won 4/5 titles without Green?  Maybe not 4... but surely a couple.  Maybe I don't have enough exposure to his play, but he just doesn't strike me as having HOF gravitas.

I think Green captures both A and B.  Just not at a level where he is a lock YET. 

But as far as titles, it's a bit tricky because of just how events played out.  He was necessary for title #1.  Remember that they lost in year 2, when he was ejected for game 5.  If that doesn't happen, I think they win that year, and he is a BIG reason why.  And I think losing him for 1 game + supports that.  It changed the momentum of that entire series.  Maybe one argues that, if he was THAT good, then when he returned, they should have been able to put the Cavs away.  Maybe that's true.  But momentum is a funny thing, and lots of HOF players have lost games/championships when the momentum was moving against them.

Title runs 3-5 are where it gets tricky.  And that's because, after losing #2, you get the wildcard of KD being added to the mix.  Even with him, I think they lose the 2/3 that they won if they don't have Green.  But if they don't lose #2, they likely don't get KD to come over for that next run of 3, and then what happens?  Who knows?  And what is also interesting is, without Green on the team, I don't think they get KD to come over in the first place.

Bottom line:  Without him, I don't think they get to 5 in a row in the first place, much less win 3 of those 5.  Maybe 1 or 2 out of 3 or so.  But too many variables.

[Samsara]

Here's the thing with how I view things:

I don't think the Ws win without Steph, Klay, or later, Durant. I DO think, however, that if you slotted in a solid defending, stretch 4 (say someone like Kuzma), I still think the Ws win. Draymond's skill sets and value can be replaced in the lineup, whereas I think you can't replace Steph and Klay (or Durant). That HAS to be a factor for me.

p.s. thought about an example.

Look at the first three-peat of the Bulls. Jordan (Steph) Pippen (Klay) win with Horace Grant. Grant eventually gets replace, and in his stead is Dennis Rodman and Toni Kukoc. Horance Grant is Draymond. A skilled role player who had been an all star. But no one would ever consider him a Hall of Famer. But then, you look at Rodman vs. Green. And realize that Rodman is a HOF, and then you look at Green, and he has won similar amounts of DPOY awards, all star berths, etc. Except instead of just being a defender and rebounding machine like Rodman, Green is a better passer and less effective rebounder and same elite level defender.

If they put Rodman in, and most people thought he deserved it (see my #3 category above), you can't make the argument Green shouldn't be in if Green continues to produce the statistics he has. Based on Rodman, Green should be, if he racks up a couple of more All-Defense selections and DPOY titles.

So Green's HOF candidacy is somewhere between Horace Grant and Dennis Rodman. 

[jingle.boy]

That's actually quite brilliant.

Though, Steph is no MJ.   

[Samsara]

That's actually quite brilliant.

Though, Steph is no MJ.   

Steph is nowhere close. But the way he changed the game, is sort of how Michael changed the game. That was the point I was making. Pound for pound, player compared to player, MJ in his prime vs. Steph in his prime, is no comparison whatsoever. His airness all day, all night, for eternity.

[jingle.boy]

For us fogeys, MJ will always be GOAT.