[2015] The Finals
- Thread starter Mr. S£im Citrus
- Start date
Draymond Green is the key to the Warriors being able to small ball teams to death.
A 6'7" guy who can shoot, pass and play elite defense. The man can cover over half the centers in the league. He is the key for them because they can play "Warriors ball" at all 5 positions when he starts at center. The versatility of this guy is unreal. There's nothing stopping any other good sized SF from being able to do what he does. The man gives 100% effort and plays with a chip on his shoulder. He may not have had the sexiest numbers in the finals but to me he is the reason why the Warriors were able to win the way they did.
Would Cousins eat him for breakfast? Absolutely. But they'd just run Bogut (who gives Cousins fits) at center with Green having a gigantic advantage over whoever we run out there at PF. Doesn't matter who they play. He's going to be a mismatch for somebody on the floor.
A 6'7" guy who can shoot, pass and play elite defense. The man can cover over half the centers in the league. He is the key for them because they can play "Warriors ball" at all 5 positions when he starts at center. The versatility of this guy is unreal. There's nothing stopping any other good sized SF from being able to do what he does. The man gives 100% effort and plays with a chip on his shoulder. He may not have had the sexiest numbers in the finals but to me he is the reason why the Warriors were able to win the way they did.
Would Cousins eat him for breakfast? Absolutely. But they'd just run Bogut (who gives Cousins fits) at center with Green having a gigantic advantage over whoever we run out there at PF. Doesn't matter who they play. He's going to be a mismatch for somebody on the floor.
I think the common denominator is a guy who can command and draws multiple defenders, then surrounded that guy with defenders and good 3pt shooters, while having a few role players who'll get gritty and muck it up defensively.
GS has Steph and rightly built around him. We've got Cuz, a guy who like Steph also commands the attention of multiple defenders. So going off that, surround him with defenders/shooters and we'll too have far more success.
It's the double/triple team threat combined with shooters which allows for spacing and good ball movement. Surround Steph with a bunch of DWills and they look quite different. Surround Steph with a horrible shooting cast like we have, GS also looks much different.
GS has Steph and rightly built around him. We've got Cuz, a guy who like Steph also commands the attention of multiple defenders. So going off that, surround him with defenders/shooters and we'll too have far more success.
It's the double/triple team threat combined with shooters which allows for spacing and good ball movement. Surround Steph with a bunch of DWills and they look quite different. Surround Steph with a horrible shooting cast like we have, GS also looks much different.
I think the most interesting takeaway is that the Cavaliers HAD shooters. Dellavadova was a 40% shooter over the year, J.R. Smith was at 39%, James Jones shot 36%, and Shumpert was at 34%. The problem was that the Warriors were fast enough defensively to both swarm the paint for LeBron AND close out on shooters when he kicked it out. The main problems were that the Cavs shooters couldn't do anything off the dribble once they were run off the line. The defense was compromised, you have the ball, its a prime position to attack off the dribble but none of those guys had the talent to do it. The Cavs offense was limited only to LeBron being brilliant every possession or Mozgov/Thompson cavemaning their way to garbage points in the paint. Suffice to say that the offense failed.
Contrast that to the Warrior roleplayers. When Iggy, Draymond or Barnes were run off the three point line, they were able to attack off the dribble and make plays. It helped that Curry was getting double teamed off the pick and roll, leading to 4 on 3 situations that the Warrior roleplayers were able to eviscerate after Game 3. The Warriors had acres of space to work with and their roleplayers took full advantage.
The level of defense that the Warriors and Cavaliers were playing in the Finals makes standstill shooters utterly useless. I mean, look at Klay Thompson; he was completely taken out of the series because he relied so much on spot-ups and beating defenders off of screens. Look at the way Kyle Korver was erased. All the off-ball wizards during the regular season simply disappeared in the playoffs because all of the sets that got them open looks before were swallowed up by playoff defenses.
To beat a modern NBA defense requires roleplayers who can shoot, attack defenses off the dribble to either make good, simple plays for teammates or score themselves. This is what Iggy, Barnes, Green can do.
I think both Collison and McLemore can potentially fit the bill. Ben has potential, but isn't there yet; he needs to improve his 3 point shot to about the 39-40% range, which I think is entirely possible (he was at 35.9% last year) and improve his ballhandling further. Collison I am a bit worried about because his release is so slow, but he's efficient from three, is blistering quick and makes solid decisions off the dribble. Both grade out as plus defenders too, which is critical.
Basically, its not just shooting anymore. You need to have roleplayers who can do so much more. One-dimensional players get eliminated by a locked-in defense.
Contrast that to the Warrior roleplayers. When Iggy, Draymond or Barnes were run off the three point line, they were able to attack off the dribble and make plays. It helped that Curry was getting double teamed off the pick and roll, leading to 4 on 3 situations that the Warrior roleplayers were able to eviscerate after Game 3. The Warriors had acres of space to work with and their roleplayers took full advantage.
The level of defense that the Warriors and Cavaliers were playing in the Finals makes standstill shooters utterly useless. I mean, look at Klay Thompson; he was completely taken out of the series because he relied so much on spot-ups and beating defenders off of screens. Look at the way Kyle Korver was erased. All the off-ball wizards during the regular season simply disappeared in the playoffs because all of the sets that got them open looks before were swallowed up by playoff defenses.
To beat a modern NBA defense requires roleplayers who can shoot, attack defenses off the dribble to either make good, simple plays for teammates or score themselves. This is what Iggy, Barnes, Green can do.
I think both Collison and McLemore can potentially fit the bill. Ben has potential, but isn't there yet; he needs to improve his 3 point shot to about the 39-40% range, which I think is entirely possible (he was at 35.9% last year) and improve his ballhandling further. Collison I am a bit worried about because his release is so slow, but he's efficient from three, is blistering quick and makes solid decisions off the dribble. Both grade out as plus defenders too, which is critical.
Basically, its not just shooting anymore. You need to have roleplayers who can do so much more. One-dimensional players get eliminated by a locked-in defense.
The Warriors won, but it ended up being much much tougher than anyone anticipated against a very depleted Cavs team.
Seriously, Kobe in his prime can't take this Cavs team to the playoffs if he replaced LeBron. What we saw in the series is, if you play small ball against a team that's the best at it and wants to play small, you will never win. I hope Vivek realizes that.
The Cavs were most effective when they slowed the game down. Who cares if the Warriors try to run when they are on offense. Don't let them gain that back and forth up and down momentum.
For the Kings, we need to play to our own strength. Vivek needs to stop trying to be Warriors North and see surrounding Cousins with play makers and shooters is the key. Lets see if the new age positionless teams can defend the low post beast that Cousins is with their 6'7" centers. No matter how versatile you are, try not double teaming Cousins on the low block.
If you do, see what happens when Cousins dishes to shooters and playmakers around him. We just need ball movement, shooters and a couple more play makers. Gay and Collison already can do that. Ben might improve and I'm hoping that Nik and starting shooting the 3 ball like he can. With a good defense (also adding WCS perhaps), we have enough talent to compete if we put it together.
Seriously, Kobe in his prime can't take this Cavs team to the playoffs if he replaced LeBron. What we saw in the series is, if you play small ball against a team that's the best at it and wants to play small, you will never win. I hope Vivek realizes that.
The Cavs were most effective when they slowed the game down. Who cares if the Warriors try to run when they are on offense. Don't let them gain that back and forth up and down momentum.
For the Kings, we need to play to our own strength. Vivek needs to stop trying to be Warriors North and see surrounding Cousins with play makers and shooters is the key. Lets see if the new age positionless teams can defend the low post beast that Cousins is with their 6'7" centers. No matter how versatile you are, try not double teaming Cousins on the low block.
If you do, see what happens when Cousins dishes to shooters and playmakers around him. We just need ball movement, shooters and a couple more play makers. Gay and Collison already can do that. Ben might improve and I'm hoping that Nik and starting shooting the 3 ball like he can. With a good defense (also adding WCS perhaps), we have enough talent to compete if we put it together.
Lebron James: 35.8PPG, 13.3RPG, 8.8APG
Iggy: 16.3PPG, 5.8RPG, 4.0APG
I'm an Iggy fan, and if someone from the Warriors just had to win the MVP because they won, then he deserved it definitely. I don't disagree with that.... BUT....
Just look at the difference above in stats. If you were to double Iggy's stats, literally double every single category above, he would still not surpass Lebron in any of them. When it comes to the MVP, I ask myself this question. Which player does their respective team depend on most? In these Finals, would the Warriors be able to beat the Cavs without Iggy? Maybe, they still have a loaded roster with or without Iggy, but (and this is the pinnacle of the debate for me) would the Cavs have had any chance without Lebron? Without Lebron, the Cavs lose every single game by 30+ at least (and that's being kind). Without Iggy, I still think the Warriors wear out the Cavs and win, maybe in 7 games instead of 6.
That is why Lebron should have been the MVP. There was not a player in these Finals that was depended on more than Lebron. That is the very definition of Most Valuable Player. If they want to create an MVP-WT (Winning Team), by all means give it to Iggy, but don't insult Lebron along the way.
Iggy: 16.3PPG, 5.8RPG, 4.0APG
I'm an Iggy fan, and if someone from the Warriors just had to win the MVP because they won, then he deserved it definitely. I don't disagree with that.... BUT....
Just look at the difference above in stats. If you were to double Iggy's stats, literally double every single category above, he would still not surpass Lebron in any of them. When it comes to the MVP, I ask myself this question. Which player does their respective team depend on most? In these Finals, would the Warriors be able to beat the Cavs without Iggy? Maybe, they still have a loaded roster with or without Iggy, but (and this is the pinnacle of the debate for me) would the Cavs have had any chance without Lebron? Without Lebron, the Cavs lose every single game by 30+ at least (and that's being kind). Without Iggy, I still think the Warriors wear out the Cavs and win, maybe in 7 games instead of 6.
That is why Lebron should have been the MVP. There was not a player in these Finals that was depended on more than Lebron. That is the very definition of Most Valuable Player. If they want to create an MVP-WT (Winning Team), by all means give it to Iggy, but don't insult Lebron along the way.
I think there's a reasonably strong argument that the MVP in a major sports championship goes by convention (whether it is "written in the rules" or not) to a player on the winning team. Across MLB, NBA, and NFL each league has awarded the championship MVP to a player on the losing team exactly once, the most recent time in 1971 in the NFL. So that means we've got 44 years across those three major sports worth of precedent to award the championship MVP to a player on the winning team.
The NHL is a bit of a different beast (and I'm never quite sure whether to consider it a major sport or not - it seems to be quite clearly #4 on the hierarchy) and has awarded the Stanley Cup MVP to a losing player 5 times, most recently in 2003. If the NBA had the same tradition as the NHL of sometimes awarding the finals MVP to a player on the losing team, LeBron would have a very strong case. But in the current NBA it seems pretty clear that the unwritten rule is that the finals MVP goes to a player on the winning team. In effect, the MVP IS an MVP-WT, it's just not called that. And I highly doubt that LeBron feels insulted by the selection of Iggy - I'm sure he perfectly understands that the MVP goes to a winning player. In fact, he'd probably be pretty sore about having to go back out there on the court while the Warriors are celebrating to accept the award, having just lost the championship.
The NHL is a bit of a different beast (and I'm never quite sure whether to consider it a major sport or not - it seems to be quite clearly #4 on the hierarchy) and has awarded the Stanley Cup MVP to a losing player 5 times, most recently in 2003. If the NBA had the same tradition as the NHL of sometimes awarding the finals MVP to a player on the losing team, LeBron would have a very strong case. But in the current NBA it seems pretty clear that the unwritten rule is that the finals MVP goes to a player on the winning team. In effect, the MVP IS an MVP-WT, it's just not called that. And I highly doubt that LeBron feels insulted by the selection of Iggy - I'm sure he perfectly understands that the MVP goes to a winning player. In fact, he'd probably be pretty sore about having to go back out there on the court while the Warriors are celebrating to accept the award, having just lost the championship.
I completely get all of that Capt, but whether or not its an unwritten rule, Lebron was the best player on the court and his team needed him most and to me, that's what an MVP is. I understand the tradition and the "just how valuable can you be if you lose?" train of thought, but many of us defend Cousins and his brilliance for example, even though we haven't cracked 30 wins since he has been here (not trying to stir up a storm, just an example). Just seems like a double standard. Like I said, if it had to be anyone else, it would be Iggy, so in that sense I am ok with the decision.
That's not how this works: I'm not the one who made any proclamations about what the Finals MVP award is, you are. The burden of proof is on you, jack! 
You're the one who claimed that the Finals MVP award "means you helped your team win the Championship." Prove it.
You're the one who claimed that the Finals MVP award "means you helped your team win the Championship." Prove it.
I'm not sure about this. Of course drawing doubles/triples is the foundation of basketball to a certain point. But I do believe it matters how you draw them. I do believe it's more difficult to double team a player, when he has the momentum in his favor and his defender is already beaten or the defense is not allowed to set up.
Usually a team will send the player best suited for defending your best offensive weapon - like Iggy versus Lebron. Beating this defender 1vs1 and dealing with the double team is a difficult thing. We saw that in the matchups versus GS this season, when Bogut covered DMC.
Now I believe that if we are able to make the defense move and DMC has the momentum going his way and can attack a moving defender, that things would be a bit easier for him.
But let me add, that outside the amount of TO I'm not worried about our offense at all. I don't care how we score, als long as we score efficient and without giving the opponents countless fast break opportunities.
What really concerns me is that, we need to find a way to deal with those smallish teams on the defensive end.
We need to do a better job defending the 3pt line and defending jumpshots, penetration and transition offense, than they do defending DMC and Rudy in the paint. And because of all the space created by having 4-5 shooters on the floor, because of the rule changes, because of the way the NBA deals with Big Man in contrast to jumpshooters, because of the zone defense and the quality of todays jumpshooters, when shooting off the dribble and coming off of screens, this will be a quite difficult task.
Usually a team will send the player best suited for defending your best offensive weapon - like Iggy versus Lebron. Beating this defender 1vs1 and dealing with the double team is a difficult thing. We saw that in the matchups versus GS this season, when Bogut covered DMC.
Now I believe that if we are able to make the defense move and DMC has the momentum going his way and can attack a moving defender, that things would be a bit easier for him.
But let me add, that outside the amount of TO I'm not worried about our offense at all. I don't care how we score, als long as we score efficient and without giving the opponents countless fast break opportunities.
What really concerns me is that, we need to find a way to deal with those smallish teams on the defensive end.
We need to do a better job defending the 3pt line and defending jumpshots, penetration and transition offense, than they do defending DMC and Rudy in the paint. And because of all the space created by having 4-5 shooters on the floor, because of the rule changes, because of the way the NBA deals with Big Man in contrast to jumpshooters, because of the zone defense and the quality of todays jumpshooters, when shooting off the dribble and coming off of screens, this will be a quite difficult task.
Yes, that is indeed a fact, but that wasn't his argument. That might have been what he meant, but that's not what he said.
I understand that the award is usually issued to a guy on the winning team, but the point is that you're not going to find anything written down anywhere that specifies that the voters are obliged to do that. In fact, I doubt that you can find anything written down anywhere that specifies what the criteria for the award is, which basically means that the criteria for the award is whatever the people who vote for the award say it is.
The fact that the vote wasn't at least unanimous in favor of some player on the winning team should tell you that there's no consensus that a player from the winning team has to get it. Not saying that it should have been unanimous for Iguodala (there probably should have been a couple of votes for Curry), but if there were any kind of rule, written or otherwise, that the award had to go to a guy on the winning team, then LeBron James would have received zero votes.
I understand that the award is usually issued to a guy on the winning team, but the point is that you're not going to find anything written down anywhere that specifies that the voters are obliged to do that. In fact, I doubt that you can find anything written down anywhere that specifies what the criteria for the award is, which basically means that the criteria for the award is whatever the people who vote for the award say it is.
The fact that the vote wasn't at least unanimous in favor of some player on the winning team should tell you that there's no consensus that a player from the winning team has to get it. Not saying that it should have been unanimous for Iguodala (there probably should have been a couple of votes for Curry), but if there were any kind of rule, written or otherwise, that the award had to go to a guy on the winning team, then LeBron James would have received zero votes.
Everybody knows Lebron was the best player in the series. Was he so much better than everyone else that he probably deserved the MVP anyway despite only winning 2 out of 6 games? Yeah, I think so. But I also don't think Lebron has any interest in keeping a trophy for Finals MVP in a series he lost. That's a factor here too. What good does it do giving it to him? He doesn't want it and you're taking it away from someone on GS who also played well, lead their team to a championship, and does want it.
And the thing is, Igoudala completely turned the series around for Golden State. After he was moved into the starting lineup the Warriors won 3 in a row. Lebron stopped getting easy shots. And he had his best game of the series in game 6 while Lebron had one of his worst. It'd be a lot harder for me to say Lebron shouldn't get the MVP if he played his best game of the series in game 6 and they still lost. He wasn't good enough to get his team to game 7 and that's what the Finals MVP award is about-- not the best player in the series overall but the player who did the most to get his team the win. Factoring in Igoudala's defense as well, he was the best player on the floor in game 6 and did more to contribute to the win than anyone else on GS. I think they got it right.
And the thing is, Igoudala completely turned the series around for Golden State. After he was moved into the starting lineup the Warriors won 3 in a row. Lebron stopped getting easy shots. And he had his best game of the series in game 6 while Lebron had one of his worst. It'd be a lot harder for me to say Lebron shouldn't get the MVP if he played his best game of the series in game 6 and they still lost. He wasn't good enough to get his team to game 7 and that's what the Finals MVP award is about-- not the best player in the series overall but the player who did the most to get his team the win. Factoring in Igoudala's defense as well, he was the best player on the floor in game 6 and did more to contribute to the win than anyone else on GS. I think they got it right.
That is true, but this LeBron thing kind of put the proof to it forevermore, and rendered the FMVP even more utterly meaningless than it has always been. Now its basically 2 or 3 guys on a single team competing with each other over the course of 4-7 games. That takes big whoop and makes youth soccer participation trophies seem significant.
How about this for proof LeBron doesn't deserve it?
http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/2544...2014-15&SeasonType=Playoffs&VsConference=West
39-137 (28%) from outside of 5 ft during the NBA finals.
http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/2544...2014-15&SeasonType=Playoffs&VsConference=West
39-137 (28%) from outside of 5 ft during the NBA finals.
Because it's a meaningless individual achievement if you don't win the championship. It means something to Andre Igoudala -- he's got a championship ring and a trophy that says he was his team's most outstanding player in winning that ring. For Lebron it basically would mean "nice try, sorry your teammates weren't better". As long as we're arbitrarily doling out individual achievements in a team game, at least dole them out to a player who might be honored to receive it, not somebody who's going to lock it in a closet and throw away the key. I don't know that there's an objective right or wrong answer here. For me, whether Lebron even wants to win the individual MVP in a losing effort does matter.
So what? That doesn't mean that the voters should ask the players what they want before they vote, or take their feelings into consideration. Why should they do that?
Beg your pardon, but where on the trophy does it say that?
Again, so what? The players don't vote on this thing; why should whether they want the award make a difference?
You don't really say why you think it should matter, you just seem to expect me to accept that it should. But, why should I accept that?
Beg your pardon, but where on the trophy does it say that?
Again, so what? The players don't vote on this thing; why should whether they want the award make a difference?
You don't really say why you think it should matter, you just seem to expect me to accept that it should. But, why should I accept that?