Black Mamba never lost after taking a 2-1 lead in the Finals

[sbw19]

Just a reminder that killer instinct counts when it comes to all-time rankings.

IMO (in addition to his talent and 5 rings) his status as a top-10 alltime great is safe just for that very simple fact.

[ArbitraryWater]

yayyyyyy simpleton logic... Kobe fans love it!!!

who would have thought a guy winning in 5 of the 7 finals his team has played in, would have favorable stats when his team is up....................

[SouBeachTalents]

Can't say the same for 3-1 leads in the first round though

[HOoopCityJones]

yayyyyyy simpleton logic... Kobe fans love it!!!

who would have thought a guy winning in 5 of the 7 finals his team has played in, would have favorable stats when his team is up....................

Meltdown. :roll:

[HOoopCityJones]

Can't say the same for 3-1 leads in the first round though

Yea, well not everyone gets to play with the Great Kwame Brown.

[DMAVS41]

I'm not sure the mamba ever beat a team as good as these Warriors in the finals though.

The two clear cut best teams mamba faced in the finals...he lost.

[G0ATbe]

GOAT gonna GOAT:pimp:.

[oh the horror]

I'm not sure the mamba ever beat a team as good as these Warriors in the finals.





:biggums:

[sportjames23]

Can't say the same for 3-1 leads in the first round though


http://www.wotyougot.com/pictures//2012/02/dr-dre-the-wash.gif

[HOoopCityJones]

:biggums:

DMAVS mission in life is to downplay Kobe's career. Let him be. :oldlol:

[DMAVS41]

:biggums:

Which team was better?

[Mr. Jabbar]

Which team was better?

'10 celtics, do you actually have any doubts? lmao :roll:

[DMAVS41]

'10 celtics, do you actually have any doubts? lmao :roll:

LOL...yes, I have serious doubts. We'll see what happens the rest of the series before I put the 10 Celtics above this Warriors team...a team that from start to this point in time...looks like the better team to me.

[ArbitraryWater]

2010 Celtics honestly getting seriously overrated... 2010-2012 C's were not the 2008 or 2009 C's anymore.. KG declined, everybody getting older..

[SouBeachTalents]

2010 Celtics honestly getting seriously overrated... 2010-2012 C's were not the 2008 or 2009 C's anymore.. KG declined, everybody getting older..

The regular season, no doubt. They honestly half-assed/mailed in the last 2/3's of the season. In the playoffs though, they were pretty legit. They came within an eyelash of taking out arguably the 4 best players in the league (Wade, LeBron, Howard, Kobe)

[HOoopCityJones]

LMAO at GSW being better than the Celtics.

[DMAVS41]

LMAO at GSW being better than the Celtics.

You are too biased to even be taken seriously if you don't think it's worth debating.

We do have the 538 talent model. Hardly end all be all, but it rates the teams as:

Warriors:

Curry +6.5....teammates....+4.5

Celtics:

Rondo +3.2....teammates....+4.5


They are literally right next to each other on the 538 supporting cast scale.

We need to see how this series goes before anything definitive can be said, if at all.

But just dismissing it? Yea...that's because you are too biased to understand it's absolutely debatable.

[HOoopCityJones]

And you're not biased? :roll:


GTFOutta here.

[DMAVS41]

And you're not biased? :roll:


GTFOutta here.

i have preferences like anyone, but i'm not gonna act like the warriors are clearly the better team.

which is the equivalent of what you are doing.

not hard...keep up clown.

[Akhenaten]

http://www.wotyougot.com/pictures//2012/02/dr-dre-the-wash.gif


:oldlol: :oldlol:

[HOoopCityJones]

They aren't clearly the better Team, not even close, cupcake.

[catch24]

The Warriors are struggling with a team who's missing 2 of the 3 of their best players.

They're not close to the 2010 Celtics. lol.

[DMAVS41]

They aren't clearly the better Team, not even close, cupcake.

What?

I'm not saying that. You are the one claiming the 10 Celtics are clearly the better team.

Are you not?

[DMAVS41]

The Warriors are struggling with a team who's missing 2 of the 3 of their best players.

They're not close to the 2010 Celtics. lol.

And here we go...makes my point for me right on time.

:facepalm

[catch24]

And here we go...makes my point for me right on time.

:facepalm

You don't have a point. Nobody with a brain would rank this soft Warriors team with the Celtics.

:confusedshrug:

[tpols]

Dmavs you have really fallen off dude. :oldlol:

[NumberSix]

So OP is basically saying, Kobe could never go up 2-1 against a superior team?

[brownmamba00]

that version of KG would destroy the soft warriors' confidence if they would play against eachother

we're talking about this guy curry would be scared to play

http://i.imgur.com/uURMQH6.gif

[DMAVS41]

Well...I have a brain and I definitely would have up until games 2 and 3 of these finals.

The 538 study ranks them as more talented.

I need to see how this series plays out though...if the warriors lose...yep...not as good.

If they win? We'll talk about it and debate it.

But acting like it's not debatable because of two poor games in the finals is silly.

Plenty of people, in fact I'd bet most, would have taken this Warriors team over the 10 Celtics after game 1 of the NBA finals. So either those two shit games are a product of this team being soft and not as good as we all thought...or it's not indicative of much.

Oh how easily we write off a dominant two way team that won 67 with the MVP and a great supporting cast....to prop Kobe.

[DMAVS41]

Dmavs you have really fallen off dude. :oldlol:

I don't speak moron.

Gave you a chance.

Dat Tony Allen put the 08 Celtics over the top.

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[tpols]

that version of KG would destroy the soft warriors' confidence if they would play against eachother

we're talking about this guy curry would be scared to play

http://i.imgur.com/uURMQH6.gif

KG and Perk would make Bogut and green their b!tches.. peak defensive rondo on the MVP.. ray and tony allen to throw at Klay, plus an overwhelming veteran presence.

Shit would be funny. :lol

[DMAVS41]

KG and Perk would make Bogut and green their b!tches.. peak defensive rondo on the MVP.. ray and tony allen to throw at Klay, plus an overwhelming veteran presence.

Shit would be funny. :lol

Yes...so funny that they measure out worse than the Warriors on just about all fronts.

You guys might be right, we'll find out more these next 2 or 3 games.

[ArbitraryWater]

KG and Perk would make Bogut and green their b!tches.. peak defensive rondo on the MVP.. ray and tony allen to throw at Klay, plus an overwhelming veteran presence.

Shit would be funny. :lol

yea... and 2008 Tony Allen would make them their bitches too, right? He cancels out Igoudala, amirite?

Copetards can't cope :lol brainless bunch

[DMAVS41]

yea... and 2008 Tony Allen would make them their bitches too, right? He cancels out Igoudala, amirite?

Copetards can't cope :lol brainless bunch


:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

[imdaman99]

Yes...so funny that they measure out worse than the Warriors on just about all fronts.

You guys might be right, we'll find out more these next 2 or 3 games.
This year's Grizzlies were a homeless man's version of those Celtics except they couldn't shoot like them. I think those Celtics probably win in 7 against these Warriors. It's not an easy answer though, just my opinion. This year's Grizz gave the Warriors a little trouble themselves.

[DMAVS41]

This year's Grizzlies were a homeless man's version of those Celtics except they couldn't shoot like them. I think those Celtics probably win in 7 against these Warriors. It's not an easy answer though, just my opinion. This year's Grizz gave the Warriors a little trouble themselves.

Well, I said we don't know yet and that it's absolutely debatable.

I'm just against people, either way, saying it's not close. Because it is...at least at this point it is.

Obviously if the Warriors lose...it ends the debate.

[tpols]

yea... and 2008 Tony Allen would make them their bitches too, right? He cancels out Igoudala, amirite?

Copetards can't cope :lol brainless bunch

The space is kinda small and all.. but you should be getting something for it. PM me and ill send you a little money for the past few months.

[brownmamba00]

yea... and 2008 Tony Allen would make them their bitches too, right? He cancels out Igoudala, amirite?

Copetards can't cope :lol brainless bunch
nah bruh

I don't like the C's

but a team of kg,rondo,pp,ray,sheed and nate would eat these threepoint chucking soft bay boys up.

lmao they can barely hang with tristan thompson and delladova and you think they beat those boston teams.

[DMAVS41]

nah bruh

I don't like the C's

but a team of kg,rondo,pp,ray,sheed and nate would eat these threepoint chucking soft bay boys up.

lmao they can barely hang with tristan thompson and delladova and you think they beat those boston teams.

Head to head isn't the only way to judge teams. In fact, match ups dictate more of that than team strength to begin with....especially with teams on this level.

If the Warriors win the next 2 games by 20 points each....you guys just aren't going to feel the same way. Which is why the position that the Celtics are clearly better is flawed.

That Celtics team had flaws as well. For starters, they were a poor rebounding team and their offense got really bad at times. They were old (KG and Wallace had virtually nothing left late in the finals)

If the Warriors do happen to play like themselves these next 2 games and win.

You are looking at a pretty historic season overall and a couple shit games in the finals won't change that.

That is what is fun about sports...you get answers. We are about to find out what this team is like.

[catch24]

It's not even about the finals. Boston was just visibly tougher, stronger and a more cohesive unit all-around. Their execution was just...better.

You would have to be a serious dope to take this Warriors team over THAT Celtics squad who were loaded at all positions, INCLUDING their bench and coaching staff (Doc AND Thibs :biggums:)

[nzahir]

'10 celtics, do you actually have any doubts? lmao :roll:
So 56 wins is better than 67 wins...okay buddy.
Guys like curry(27) and klay are entering primes and guys like iggy(at about prime), bogut, lee and then newer guys like barnes and green is worse than aging pierce, kg, and ray allen. Rondo was good but no jumper. Perkins was injured in game 7.

[DMAVS41]

It's not even about the finals. Boston was just visibly tougher, stronger and a more cohesive unit all-around. Their execution was just...better.

You would have to be a serious dope to take this Warriors team over THAT Celtics squad who were loaded at all positions, INCLUDING their bench and coaching staff (Doc AND Thibs :biggums:)

Well this is just plain false.

The Warriors absolutely looked like the better and more deep team from game 1 of the season through game 1 of the finals. They have a higher talent rating on that model from 538.

They had a much better scoring differential. They were elite on both ends. They were way more versatile in their lineups they can use.

Kerr has proven to be an excellent head coach and Gentry has always been good.

That Celtics team had flaws as well man. They were one of the worst rebounding teams in the league. They were old. Their offense was brutal at times. They hardly had any 3 point shooting.



It's not the finals? So a team that goes 80-18 with the best defense, 2nd best offense, that is deep and versatile, with a double digit differential, that has a top 5 player....starts the playoffs by going 13-3....that team was visibly weaker than the 10 Celtics that whole time?

If you really believe that....you aren't even worth talking to. It's fine to take the Celtics...I might in 5 days. But to say one must be an idiot to think the Warriors were better in the first 98 games of the season....damn...even for a Kobe stan that is absurd.

[warriorfan]

that version of KG would destroy the soft warriors' confidence if they would play against eachother

we're talking about this guy curry would be scared to play

http://i.imgur.com/uURMQH6.gif

Sorry, AMC doesn't get shook off frowning darkskins

[DMAVS41]

It's funny...everyone here considers the 08 Celtics as an all time great team. They had a great regular season and then won a title.

Yet...they had to go to 7 games against the ****ing Hawks and Cavs. The 08 Cavs. With a Lebron that wasn't the seasoned and mature player he is now...on a team that wasn't any better (probably worse) than this current Cavs team. They lost 10 games in the playoffs...LOL

Just a horrible double standard. Unless of course all the Kobe stans are willing to stay consistent and call them not a great team. Shit, for all we know, using Kobe stan logic, the Lakers weren't very good and the 08 Celtics are just being propped up by beating an over-rated Lakers team.

7 games against the lowly Hawks and Cavs and then they dominate the Lakers in 6 and win by 39....seems to me that paints a picture of the Lakers just not being any good more than it does paint the 08 Celtics as being great...again...using moronic Kobe stan logic.

[Smook B]

Can't say the same for 3-1 leads in the first round though

Damn :roll:

[Smook B]

Can't say the same for 3-1 leads in the first round though

Underrated post.

http://i.imgur.com/ylRz8.gif

[Cold soul]

I'm not sure the mamba ever beat a team as good as these Warriors in the finals though.

The two clear cut best teams mamba faced in the finals...he lost.

Wow you sure love to troll.

[ArbitraryWater]

Wow you sure love to troll.

:biggums:

[DMAVS41]

Wow you sure love to troll.

My god people.

That isn't trolling.

The choices are:

00 Pacers
01 Sixers
02 Nets
09 Magic
10 Celtics


It sure as **** isn't the Pacers, Sixers, Nets, or Magic.

So it's 15 Warriors vs 10 Celtics...and yea...it's a legit debate. Sorry.

[catch24]

Well this is just plain false.

The Warriors absolutely looked like the better and more deep team from game 1 of the season through game 1 of the finals. They have a higher talent rating on that model from 538.

I'm not going off of your narrative though (and even then I still disagree).

As an all-around whole, the Celtics had more proven HOFers, coaches and veterans.

When comparing teams with a 5+ year gap, I don't look too much into TEAM stats - the league changes every year. From their respective years or era though, I would have to say the Celtics impressed me more. And this was before the finals when they eliminated Wade/LeBron/Dwight, all in their primes, consecutively.

They're underrated if anything.

I don't care about the other stuff, because its just more of the same things you've already said.

[DMAVS41]

I'm not going off of your narrative though (and even then I still disagree).

As an all-around whole, the Celtics had more proven HOFers, coaches and veterans.

I don't look too much into TEAM stats, because the league changes every year. From their respective years or era, I would have to say the Celtics impressed me more. And this was before the finals when they eliminated Wade/LeBron/Dwight all consecutively.

They're underrated if anything.

I don't care about the other stuff, because its just more of the same stuff you've already said.

But you aren't looking at the details. You are just looking at the names of the players.

The talent level is very close...probably slightly favors the Warriors.

It's not a narrative. It's too simple to just take the team with HOF players or whatever.

The 10 Celtics had serious flaws. Again, they were old, they couldn't rebound worth shit, and they had virtually no 3 point shooting outside of Pierce/Allen. Those things matter.

Do I think the Warriors were clearly better in the regular season? Sure, but I'm not basing much off that.

I'm saying it's close and worth debating.

You, on the other hand, are saying it's not close...and I don't think you can legitimately defend that position at all right now.

If the Warriors complete the worst choke in finals history in the coming days? I'll be right there with you, but at this point? Nah...can't go definitive one way or the other....it just wouldn't make sense given what we know.

[branslowski]

I'm not going off of your narrative though (and even then I still disagree).

As an all-around whole, the Celtics had more proven HOFers, coaches and veterans.

When comparing teams with a 5+ year gap, I don't look too much into TEAM stats - the league changes every year. From their respective years or era though, I would have to say the Celtics impressed me more. And this was before the finals when they eliminated Wade/LeBron/Dwight, all in their primes, consecutively.

They're underrated if anything.

I don't care about the other stuff, because its just more of the same things you've already said.

You do know that he's saying this Warriors team is better than that great Celtic team because he always has a hidden agenda against Kobe right?...Celtics had HOFers KG, Pierce, and Ray Allen along with a more proven Coach aswell as a greater defensive scheme that did a better Job on a more young athletic LeBron than any team has...This isn't even debatable.

[DMAVS41]

You do know that he's saying this Warriors team is better than that great Celtic team because he always has a hidden agenda against Kobe right?...Celtics had HOFers KG, Pierce, and Ray Allen along with a more proven Coach aswell as a greater defensive scheme that did a better Job on a more young athletic LeBron than any team has...This isn't even debatable.

And you have an agenda to prop Kobe.

It's absolutely debatable.

[NASH = BEST]

I'm not sure the mamba ever beat a team as good as these Warriors in the finals though.

The two clear cut best teams mamba faced in the finals...he lost.



My god people.

That isn't trolling.

The choices are:

00 Pacers
01 Sixers
02 Nets
09 Magic
10 Celtics


It sure as **** isn't the Pacers, Sixers, Nets, or Magic.

So it's 15 Warriors vs 10 Celtics...and yea...it's a legit debate. Sorry.

Well yeah, the Mamba probably never did beat a team as good as these Warriors in the Finals because well, he faced mostly shitty East teams in the Finals to begin with.

So you're right, not much of a debate there. :confusedshrug:

But how bout' when comparing the 7 West teams Kobe had to beat in the WCF to this Warriors team???

Because yeah, I'd pick any WCF finalist Kobe had to face on his way to the Finals, with exception of maybe only the 10' Suns, over this Warriors team.

[Hey Yo]

You don't have a point. Nobody with a brain would rank this soft Warriors team with the Celtics.

:confusedshrug:
But aren't the Warriors playing in what's being called the toughest WC of all time and the Celtics played in the so-called joke of a conference East?

:confusedshrug:

[catch24]

But aren't the Warriors playing in what's being called the toughest WC of all time and the Celtics played in the so-called joke of a conference East?

:confusedshrug:

Don't ask me, I never claimed this conference was the greatest all-time.

They're definitely great relative to their era, but I would never suggest they're ATG.

[Hey Yo]

Well yeah, the Mamba probably never did beat a team as good as these Warriors in the Finals because well, he faced mostly shitty East teams in the Finals to begin with.

So you're right, not much of a debate there. :confusedshrug:

But how bout' when comparing the 7 West teams Kobe had to beat in the WCF to this Warriors team???

Because yeah, I'd pick any WCF finalist Kobe had to face on his way to the Finals, with exception of maybe only the 10' Suns, over this Warriors team.
Yet he played well below his standards in the majority of those Finals.

How can his Rings be considered a great achievement if the competition was shit, he under achieved in most of the Finals and had Shaq who was the dominant first option for 3 of them?

[Doranku]

Well I'll tell you one thing. There's not a chance that the '10 Celtics would be tied 2-2 with this depleted Cavs team right now, that's for sure.

[catch24]

But you aren't looking at the details. You are just looking at the names of the players.

The talent level is very close...probably slightly favors the Warriors.

It's not a narrative. It's too simple to just take the team with HOF players or whatever.

HOFers that were 2-way players in every sense. HOFers including coaches who were more experienced and battle-tested; a nucleus that had just won a championship together.

I'm taking THAT team, and I don't need how they played in the finals, flawed stats, or anything the Warriors are doing right now to tell me otherwise.

The Warriors can win the Cavs by 20+ the next 2 games, and I would still take the Celtics 10/10 times.

They do not impress me one bit; they've been outplayed in basically all but 1 of their games this finals to a depleted team who shouldn't be matching up with them - but they do.

[Bankaii]

Can't say the same for 3-1 leads in the first round though
Dang, got eeem.

But it's hilarious how the weak east narrative is only used when it's convenient. When Lebron dominates it's because his competition is weak but now the '10 Celtics are some GOAT team while playing in the same conference? Kobe beating them was huge but the people on here and their obvious agendas is disgusting.

[SexSymbol]

I'm not sure the mamba ever beat a team as good as these Warriors in the finals though.

The two clear cut best teams mamba faced in the finals...he lost.
2010 celtics > these warriors.
And 09 ORL is very similar to these warriors, just has a better inside presence.

[Indian guy]

Well I'll tell you one thing. There's not a chance that the '10 Celtics would be tied 2-2 with this depleted Cavs team right now, that's for sure.

The same team that was taken to 7 games by the 37-win Hawks? 7 games by a 45-win Cleveland team with absolute garbage surrounding LeBron, who himself was very blah in that series? :oldlol: @ shook Kobe fans making Boston out to be this juggernaut. They were very good, yes, but they had some very glaring flaws too. No interior scoring. A PG with very little offensive ability. An offense built around 30+ year old jump shooters. That's why they only won 1 championship, and what an absolute struggle that was.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The same team that was taken to 7 games by the 37-win Hawks? 7 games by a 45-win Cleveland team with absolute garbage surrounding LeBron, who himself was very blah in that series? :oldlol: @ shook Kobe fans making Boston out to be this juggernaut. They were very good, yes, but they had some very glaring flaws too. No interior scoring. A PG with very little offensive ability. An offense built around 30+ year old jump shooters. That's why they only won 1 championship, and what an absolute struggle that was.

The Cavs won 60+ games that year, and had HC in that series vs Boston. What are you talking about?

[Indian guy]

The Cavs won 60+ games that year, and had HC in that series vs Boston. What are you talking about?

I was talking about the '08 Celtics, the team that actually won the championship. I don't see the point in gushing about the 50-win 2010 team, who got hot in the playoffs but couldn't close the deal against a Laker team in their last relevant season, despite the 6-24 game.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I was talking about the '08 Celtics, the team that actually won the championship. I don't see the point in gushing about the 50-win 2010 team, who got hot in the playoffs but couldn't close the deal against a Laker team in their last relevant season, despite the 6-24 game.

Meh, both teams were great. The 2010 Lakers were better than the 08 version, and the 10 Celtics were a slightly worse version than their 08 selves.

Both are better than the Warriors though. Comfortably.

[NASH = BEST]

Yet he played well below his standards in the majority of those Finals.

How can his Rings be considered a great achievement if the competition was shit, he under achieved in most of the Finals and had Shaq who was the dominant first option for 3 of them?

No one said Kobe's entire competition was shit when his team won the title. The point is that some of those East teams he had to face in the Finals were shitty, and that this Warriors team is better than most of what Kobe has had to face in the Finals.

Kobe's (or any player's) rings are not considered great accomplishments based only on who he beat or what he did in the Finals. That kind of stuff is more media ridden that anything else.

And yes, Shaq was always going to dominate any Eastern Conference center he faced in the Finals. That's most of the reason why his stats in the Finals were superior to Kobe's and was always going to win FMVP over him.

However, if the award was a Playoffs MVP as opposed to a Finals MVP, similar to the Conn Smythe Trophy in the NHL, then Kobe maybe wins 2 of 3 over Shaq during their 3-Peat.

If you remember correctly, Kobe would kill it in the WCF, which many considered the REAL FINALS, and would just let Shaq do his thing in the Finals.

I guess there was nothing else to prove, remember that Lakers team only lost 3 times in the Finals in 3 years. So yeah, that East competition he faced was pretty shitty.

[Indian guy]

Both are better than the Warriors though. Comfortably.

Nah, they are not. Way too dependent on a great defense in order to win, which is why the playoffs were always such a struggle for them, where the advantage of a great D is neutralized somewhat because everybody plays hard. Their offense was so hit and miss though. That's why they only won 1. GS is much more balanced on the other hand, which is why they have dominated this season so far like Boston never could. In the mighty West too to boot, while Boston couldn't do so in the "historically weak East".

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Nah, they are not. Way too dependent on a great defense in order to win, which is why the playoffs were always such a struggle for them, where the advantage of a great D is neutralized somewhat because everybody plays hard. Their offense was so hit and miss though. That's why they only won 1. GS is much more balanced on the other hand, which is why they have dominated this season so far like Boston never could. In the mighty West too to boot, while Boston couldn't do so in the "historically weak East".

Their offense was worlds better in the postseason, so when you combine that with their defense there's just no argument to be had.

Prior to game 4, the Warriors were struggling to score with a D-League Cavs team, hence the recent talks of "paper tiger". They're a solid team with glaring weaknesses who would get exposed, everytime, against someone with a great balance of offense and defense (Lakers and Celtics in 2010).

By the way, the "historically weak East" only applies to the Heat titles and beyond. Not the same conference where LeBron's Cavs had homecourt and still lost in the playoffs.

[Wade's Rings]

I was talking about the '08 Celtics, the team that actually won the championship. I don't see the point in gushing about the 50-win 2010 team, who got hot in the playoffs but couldn't close the deal against a Laker team in their last relevant season, despite the 6-24 game.

They coasted in the Regular Season and were much deeper than their 50 Wins indicate. They won 56 the very next year.

[Indian guy]

Their offense was worlds better in the postseason

Actually, it wasn't. Their ORTG fell and their offensive ranking relative to the league dipped in both '08 and '10. In fact, they ranked a dreadful 12th out of 16 in 2010. They were a team that had serious issues putting the ball in the hole.


Prior to game 4, the Warriors were struggling to score with a D-League Cavs team, hence the recent talks of "paper tiger".

Are you serious? :oldlol:. What do you think Boston was being called through the first 2 rounds of 2008?? Believe me, "paper tigers" would have actually been a compliment.


They're a good team

Yeah, just a good team that has ranked 1st on both ends of the court in both regular season and playoffs so far :rolleyes:


By the way, the "historically weak East" only implies to the Heat titles and beyond

That's convenient :oldlol:, and says who? The East has always been considered very weak post-MJ, and most vociferously by LeBron-hating trolls like yourself.



Not the same conference where LeBron's Cavs had homecourt and still lost in the playoffs.

Wouldn't the fact that LeBron was winning 60+ games with 20-win casts actually be an argument in favor of the East being ridiculously weak? You are all over the place, dude. Many agendas leading to an inconsistent argument.

[Hey Yo]

Their offense was worlds better in the postseason, so when you combine that with their defense there's just no argument to be had.

Prior to game 4, the Warriors were struggling to score with a D-League Cavs team, hence the recent talks of "paper tiger". They're a solid team with glaring weaknesses who would get exposed, everytime, against someone with a great balance of offense and defense (Lakers and Celtics in 2010).

By the way, the "historically weak East" only applies to the Heat titles and beyond. Not the same conference where LeBron's Cavs had homecourt and still lost in the playoffs.
As a Kobe fan, of course you would say that considering LA hasn't sniffed a Finals since 2010.

[Bandito]

2010 Celtics honestly getting seriously overrated... 2010-2012 C's were not the 2008 or 2009 C's anymore.. KG declined, everybody getting older..these same old C's took the Heat to 7 games and they were even older.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Actually, it wasn't. Their ORTG fell and their offensive ranking relative to the league dipped in both '08 and '10. In fact, they ranked a dreadful 12th out of 16 in 2010. They were a team that had serious issues putting the ball in the hole.

Where are you getting the playoff stats from? Please post them.

B-ref says the ORTG difference between the '10 Lakers and Celtics was ~1%. LA won the title. :oldlol:


Are you serious? :oldlol:. What do you think Boston was being called through the first 2 rounds of 2008?? Believe me, "paper tigers" would have actually been a compliment.

Relative to matchups, the '08 Cavs arguably had more talent than what they're putting out there now. lol @ the Knicks' waste-basket.

This Cavs team would've been eviscerated by the '08 Celts.


Yeah, just a good team that has ranked 1st on both ends of the court in both regular season and playoffs so far :rolleyes:

They're not better than the '08 / 10 Celtics nor the '10 Lakers.

I consider those teams great, and this team good.


That's convenient :oldlol:

It's the truth.

The '10 Celtics, '10 Magic, and '10 Cavs were better than anything LeBron faced from 2012 and 2013 in the east.


Wouldn't the fact that LeBron was winning 60+ games with 20-win casts actually be an argument in favor of the East being ridiculously weak?

It would actually imply the opposite. Vegas and ESPN had the Cavs as favoirtes both years they had homecourt; they ended up losing twice. In reality that suggests parody, and, well, LeBron quitting in 2010.

[Indian guy]

Where are you getting the playoff stats from? Please post them.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/NBA_2008.html?lid=header_playoffs

http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/NBA_2010.html?lid=header_playoffs

Dip in both offensive rating and ranking in both postseason runs and very understandably so too. Their offense was so dependent on their aged Big 3 making long jump shots.


Relative to matchups, the '08 Cavs arguably had more talent than what they're putting out there now.

Big Z=>Mozgov
Ben Wallace<Thompson
LeBron<=LeBron
West=Shumpert
Gibson=Dellavedova

'08 did have the better bench, but Blatt>Brown. I'd call the rosters roughly a toss-up, with a slight edge towards the 2015 team.


This Cavs team would've been eviscerated by the '08 Celts.

Yeah, no. Not even close. Boston couldn't score in that series to save their life and that Cleveland team wasn't close defensively to the current one. And they still took 'em to 7 and actually had a great shot at winning Game 7.


They're not better than the '08 / 10 Celtics nor the '10 Lakers.

Yeah, great argument, backed with stats and sound reasoning :rolleyes:


I consider those teams great, and this team good.

#1 on both ends of the court all freaking year in a loaded conference but they are merely "good" :oldlol:, but Boston, a team whose offense consistently fell apart in the playoffs, was "great" :rolleyes:


The '10 Celtics, '10 Magic, and '10 Cavs were better than anything LeBron faced from 2012 and 2013 in the east.

Why are you including the Celtics themselves when we are discussing their competition? And again, why are you conveniently forgetting the '08 Celtics, the team that actually won the championship in a pretty weak East?


It would actually imply the opposite. Vegas and ESPN had the Cavs as favoirtes both years they had HC against Orlando and Boston - they ended up losing twice.

Cleveland were the favorites because of having the league's best record - which was solely because of LeBron James. The playoffs merely proved 1-star teams with bad coaching don't do sh!t on the big stage.


LeBron quitting in 2010 as well.

I've never understood this. The same idiots who can never stop gushing about the 2010 Celtics, an all-time great supposedly, are also the same idiots who can never shut up about LeBron losing to them that season with a roster that couldn't win 20 games without him the following season.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

ORTG

I'll repeat this again:

B-ref says the ORTG difference between the '10 Lakers and Celtics was ~1%. LA won the title

Thoughts?


#1 on both ends of the court all freaking year in a loaded conference but they are merely "good" :oldlol:, but Boston, a team whose offense consistently fell apart in the playoffs, was "great" :rolleyes:

Yeah the '10 Celtics had already come off a championship and are one of the greatest defenses ever. The Warriors are struggling with a D-Level Cavs team.

How do you not see the difference? :oldlol:


Why are you including the Celtics themselves when we are discussing their competition? And again, why are you conveniently forgetting the '08 Celtics, the team that actually won the championship in a pretty weak East?

Huh? The Celtics in 2008 and 2010 are NOT the same version as the 2011 and 12 teams who were without Thibs and a few notable contributors. Age and attrition plus the difference in style of play. Dumb comparison.


I've never understood this. The same idiots who can never stop gushing about the 2010 Celtics, an all-time great supposedly, are also the same idiots who can never shut up about LeBron losing to them that season with a roster that couldn't win 20 games without him the following season.

False equivalency. LeBron quitting =/= quality of opponent

[DMAVS41]

HOFers that were 2-way players in every sense. HOFers including coaches who were more experienced and battle-tested; a nucleus that had just won a championship together.

I'm taking THAT team, and I don't need how they played in the finals, flawed stats, or anything the Warriors are doing right now to tell me otherwise.

The Warriors can win the Cavs by 20+ the next 2 games, and I would still take the Celtics 10/10 times.

They do not impress me one bit; they've been outplayed in basically all but 1 of their games this finals to a depleted team who shouldn't be matching up with them - but they do.

And then why are you so high on the 08 Celtics?

Do you not see the double standard?

Talk about unimpressive...the 08 Celtics could have gone home in round 2 if they played in a conference as good as the current Warriors.

It's such an absurd double standard to claim this Warriors team isn't good because of a couple games. Just so stupid....

If they lose the series...then yea...I get it...they shouldn't be thought of very highly....

But to dominate all year and then go 16-5 in the playoffs...and they aren't as good as an old Celtics team that couldn't rebound or shoot worth shit....

Nah....you are just too blind to see.

[PickernRoller]

DMAVS still embarrasing himself after all these years. :facepalm :facepalm

[DMAVS41]

I'll repeat this again:


Thoughts?



Yeah the '10 Celtics had already come off a championship and are one of the greatest defenses ever. The Warriors are struggling with a D-Level Cavs team.

How do you not see the difference? :oldlol:



Huh? The Celtics in 2008 and 2010 are NOT the same version as the 2011 and 12 teams who were without Thibs and a few notable contributors. Age and attrition plus the difference in style of play. Dumb comparison.



False equivalency. LeBron quitting =/= quality of opponent


And what do you say about the 08 Celtics struggling even more with a worse version of Lebron/Cavs with a much worse coach?

Are the 08 Celtics not a great team then?

They looked anything but impressive in their playoff run. It took a Kobe choke in the swing game of the series and Kobe standard "give up" in an elimination game for them to look good.

I want to know why the 08 Celtics are thought of as highly as they are if not looking impressive while winning is such a big deal...because those Hawks and Cavs are not as good as the current Cavs....and the Celtics were like 1 bounce of the ball a different way from losing in 08.

Please explain.

[DMAVS41]

DMAVS still embarrasing himself after all these years. :facepalm :facepalm

Does it pain you that you can't argue soundly enough to even converse with me?

[PickernRoller]

Does it pain you that you can't argue soundly enough to even converse with me?

I actually did for a time, made you look a like a fool and it's been better for time-management to ignore your nonsense - since well, you keep arguing like a moron.

[catch24]

And then why are you so high on the 08 Celtics?

Do you not see the double standard?

Talk about unimpressive...the 08 Celtics could have gone home in round 2 if they played in a conference as good as the current Warriors.

It's such an absurd double standard to claim this Warriors team isn't good because of a couple games. Just so stupid....

If they lose the series...then yea...I get it...they shouldn't be thought of very highly....

So 2 games is all it takes for you to change your opinion dramatically? Talk about a logical fallacy. :oldlol:

Again, I'm not gonna equate teams or their competition to others in separate years.

Boston was visibility better - from experience to coaching, top-to-bottom. The 2008 Celtics were even more impressive, but again, I am not going off of your narrative.

Just because Atlanta took the Celtics to 7 games, doesn't mean they're better than the Lakers who only took Boston to 6. It's all about matchups IMO.

[DMAVS41]

So 2 games is all it takes for you to change your opinion dramatically? Talk about a logical fallacy. :oldlol:

Again, I'm not gonna equate teams or their competition to others in separate years.

Boston was visibility better - from experience to coaching, top-to-bottom. The 2008 Celtics were even more impressive, but again, I am not going off of your narrative.

Just because Atlanta took the Celtics to 7 games, doesn't mean they're better than the Lakers who only took Boston to 6. It's all about matchups IMO.

2 games? What...I'm the one saying it won't.

You are caught here. Look at your logic...it's all about match ups....then using this finals against the Warriors makes no sense on your own logic.

If it has nothing to do with the finals...then you just aren't giving this Warriors team nearly enough credit for how good they were/are....and you are clearly not understanding the serious flaws that 10 Celtics team had.

Again...they were old, relied heavily on Perkins/Big Baby (not a good thing), couldn't shoot from 3 at all outside of Pierce/Allen, and couldn't rebound for shit.

Now, despite all that, they were a very good team and in the range of this current Warriors team....but they had flaws...and ignoring them is silly.

You keep saying:

"Boston was visibly better"

But they weren't....I see them both and would take the Warriors if I had to. And if the Celtics were so much better...why doesn't it show up anywhere? Why isn't their talent rating higher? Why doesn't it show up anywhere we can look to see team strength?

You are making a pretty bold claim here...and you need more than "they look better" to back it up.

[catch24]

2 games? What...I'm the one saying it won't.

You are caught here. Look at your logic...it's all about match ups....then using this finals against the Warriors makes no sense on your own logic.

The depleted Cavs who are without 2/3 of their best players should not be matching up with the Warriors or ANY supposed ATG team.

But again your narrative is dependent on 2 more games. Just 2. I have repeatedly said that regardless of the finals, the way they play would be disastrous vs. the super teams in the 80s/90s/00s.


If it has nothing to do with the finals...then you just aren't giving this Warriors team nearly enough credit for how good they were/are....and you are clearly not understanding the serious flaws that 10 Celtics team had.

Maybe I'm not, but they haven't been all that impressive.

They're too reliant on jumpshots, haven't shut any superstars down, and are soft as butter. They're front-runners basically.


I see them both and would take the Warriors if I had to.

You would take the Warriors over the 2010 AND 2008 Celtics? :oldlol:

[Hey Yo]

How is it considered that LeBron quit when he put up 27-19 and 10 in a must win game 6?

[Wade's Rings]

How is it considered that LeBron quit when he put up 27-19 and 10 in a must win game 6?

9 or 10 Turnovers IIRC with shit shooting :applause:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

And what do you say about the 08 Celtics struggling even more with a worse version of Lebron/Cavs with a much worse coach?

Are the 08 Celtics not a great team then?

They looked anything but impressive in their playoff run. It took a Kobe choke in the swing game of the series and Kobe standard "give up" in an elimination game for them to look good.

I want to know why the 08 Celtics are thought of as highly as they are if not looking impressive while winning is such a big deal...because those Hawks and Cavs are not as good as the current Cavs....and the Celtics were like 1 bounce of the ball a different way from losing in 08.

Please explain.

I don't think they are worse. The way the Cavs' offense looked in this series = trash. The '08 Celtics shut Kobe down, while LeBron quit. I've said there's a difference.

The 2008 Celts have multiple HOFers, more vets, and better coaching. I can see why they're touted. :confusedshrug:

[Wade's Rings]

I don't think they are worse. The way the Cavs' offense looked in this series = trash. The '08 Celtics shut Kobe down, while LeBron quit. I've said there's a difference.

The 2008 Cavs have multiple HOFers, more vets, and better coaching. I can see why they're touted. :confusedshrug:

Lebron didn't quit in 2008, he just shot shit and turned the ball over a lot.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Lebron didn't quit in 2008, he just shot shit and turned the ball over a lot.

No doubt.

DMavs is using the 2008 and 2010 team together, so I thought I would too. :lol

[DMAVS41]

The depleted Cavs who are without 2/3 of their best players should not be matching up with the Warriors or ANY supposed ATG team.

But again your narrative is dependent on 2 more games. Just 2. I have repeatedly said that regardless of the finals, the way they play would be disastrous vs. the super teams in the 80s/90s/00s.



Maybe I'm not, but they haven't been all that impressive.

They're too reliant on jumpshots, haven't shut any superstars down, and are soft as butter. They're front-runners basically.



You would take the Warriors over the 2010 AND 2008 Celtics? :oldlol:


Something isn't working here.

1. I would take the 08 Celtics over the current Warriors. I've said this repeatedly.

2. I said the 15 Warriors vs 10 Celtics is a tough call and I need to see what happens before I make it.


Now, lets examine your post. You said that this Cavs team should not be matching up with the Warriors or any supposed ATG team.

Then I ask again...why aren't you this hard on the 08 Celtics? They got taken to the brink by a worse Lebron/Cavs team/Coach....even worse...they got taken to 7 by a crappy little Hawks team.

You aren't staying consistent at all here. That is my point.

I am the one staying consistent because I'm not freaking out over a couple games out of 100...and I'm not claiming the 08 Celtics are somehow not great because they struggled multiple times in the playoffs.

You follow?


Also, the way the 10 Celtics played would be disastrous against the super teams you speak of. An old, injured, no rebounding, no shooting team isn't going to do well against the best teams of all time either. Seems like you just don't get what the 10 Celtics really were. They were a really good team...nothing more. They did nothing at any point of the season that made you think they were an all time great team.

[DMAVS41]

I don't think they are worse. The way the Cavs' offense looked in this series = trash. The '08 Celtics shut Kobe down, while LeBron quit. I've said there's a difference.

The 2008 Celts have multiple HOFers, more vets, and better coaching. I can see why they're touted. :confusedshrug:

I can see why the 08 Celtics are touted as well. I don't think they had better coaching to be honest, but we can table that.

I'm asking you why you don't go so hard on the 08 Celtics when they struggled much worse against worse teams in the playoffs than these current Cavs.

Lebron wasn't a mature leader or player back in 08...and his help/coaching was worse back then than it is now...at the least it's equal.

So why do the Celtics get a pass for having to go 7...then 7...then 6...while none of the teams they faced are any better than this Cavs team?

I'm just curious...I agree that 08 Celtics were better than this Warriors team, but I'm unclear how you are getting there on your logic.

Like it or not, this Warriors team has been historically good...they went 80-18 in their first 98 games while doing things very few teams in league history have done. The have a first ballot HOF on the roster and a well built...legit 10 deep team that can play basically any style.

If the Celtics can go 7,7,6,6 against hardly elite competition...I'm not sure the issue you guys are having with the Warriors assuming they win. It just seems like a huge double standard.

Of course, if the Warriors lose...then this is a silly comparison.

The reason the 08 Celtics is so apt here is because we all agree/know the 08 Celtics were better than the 10 Celtics. So if that is the case...then there is a clear double standard going on with this Warriors team.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I can see why the 08 Celtics are touted as well.

Then what's your deal? Why ask me all of these questions if we both agree they are better? How and why we got there is just us playing semantics. It's irrelevant far as I'm concerned.


Like it or not, this Warriors team has been historically good...

I gotta co-sign with catch on this. The Warriors are a great team relative to the era they play in. Sure; but the various champions listed here would have beaten them, eg. 2005/2007/2014 Spurs, 2009/2010 Lakers, and 2008/2010 Celts.

They just play a better brand of basketball to me. :confusedshrug:

[DMAVS41]

Then what's your deal? Why ask me all of these questions if we both agree they are better? How and why we got there is just us playing semantics. It's irrelevant far as I'm concerned.



I gotta co-sign with catch on this. The Warriors are a great team relative to the era they play in. Sure; but the various champions listed here would have beaten them, eg. 2005/2007/2014 Spurs, 2009/2010 Lakers, and 2008/2010 Celts.

They just play a better brand of basketball to me. :confusedshrug:

because you aren't holding the 08 celtics to the same standard you are holding this warriors team.

could you imagine what you'd be saying if the warriors had to go 7 back to back against teams as bad as the 08 Hawks and Cavs?????

and this debate is about a much worse team than the 08 celtics....which is the 10 Celtics. why are you listing a team like the 10 celtics over the 12 Heat or 11 Mavs???? They were so much worse...LOL

i never said this is one of the best teams ever....all I said was that the Warriors vs the 10 Celtics is a legit debate. catch and others have said it's stupid to even compare them. and i don't think that position can be defended in a legit way. and of course...it hasn't at all.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

because you aren't holding the 08 celtics to the same standard you are holding this warriors team.

could you imagine what you'd be saying if the warriors had to go 7 back to back against teams as bad as the 08 Hawks and Cavs?????

and this debate is about a much worse team than the 08 celtics....which is the 10 Celtics. why are you listing a team like the 10 celtics over the 12 Heat or 11 Mavs???? They were so much worse...LOL

i never said this is one of the best teams ever....all I said was that the Warriors vs the 10 Celtics is a legit debate. catch and others have said it's stupid to even compare them. and i don't think that position can be defended in a legit way. and of course...it hasn't at all.

Where did I do that? Have you asked me, or are you just assuming?

We both agree the 2008 Celtics are better. That's all that matters dude. The 2010 Celts lost in the finals and were an inferior version, so at least that can be debated.

[DMAVS41]

Where did I do that? Have you asked me, or are you just assuming?

We both agree the 2008 Celtics are better. That's all that matters dude. The 2010 Celts lost in the finals and were an inferior version, so at least that can be debated.

You came late.

The debate was always the 10 Celtics vs the 15 Warriors. It was never about the 08 Celtics.

The 08 Celtics part was about the double standards being floated about.

Above you listed the 10 celtics as part of the list of teams better than the Warriors and you listed a bunch of other teams as well...I assumed you were listing all the recent teams you thought were better. You said they played a "better brand of basketball"...

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

You came late.

The debate was always the 10 Celtics vs the 15 Warriors. It was never about the 08 Celtics.

The 08 Celtics part was about the double standards being floated about.

Above you listed the 10 celtics as part of the list of teams better than the Warriors and you listed a bunch of other teams as well...I assumed you were listing all the recent teams you thought were better. You said they played a "better brand of basketball"...

I can name a number of teams that I feel were better than the Warriors, but we'd be here all night. :oldlol:

[DMAVS41]

I can name a number of teams that I feel were better than the Warriors, but we'd be here all night. :oldlol:

So can I.

But what does that have to do with the double standard concerning teams like the 08 Celtics and 09 Lakers playoff struggles?

And what does it have to do with the 10 Celtics vs the 15 Warriors?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

So can I.

But what does that have to do with the double standard concerning teams like the 08 Celtics and 09 Lakers playoff struggles?

And what does it have to do with the 10 Celtics vs the 15 Warriors?

Is it really a double standard when you feel one team plays a worse brand of basketball...regardless of competition?

[IllegalD]

2010 Celtics:

Best Players:

Kevin Garnett (15x Allstar, 1x MVP, 1x DPOY, Future HOF)
Paul Pierce (10x Allstar, 1x Finals MVP, Future HOF)
Ray Allen (10x Allstar, Future HOF)
Rajon Rondo (4x Allstar)
Rasheed Wallace (4x Allstar)
Tony Allen
Nate Robinson
Kendrick Perkins

Final Tally: 5 Allstar Level Players (3 HOFs, 2 MVPs, 43 combined Allstar Selections)

Coaching: Doc Rivers (1x COY, 1x Champ); Tom Thibodeau (1x COY)



2015 Warriors:

Best Players:

Stephen Curry (2x Allstar, 1x MVP, Future HOF)
Klay Thompson (1x Allstar)
David Lee (2x Allstar)
Andre Igoudala (1x Allstar)
Andrew Bogut
Harrison Barnes
Shaun Livingston
Leandro Barbosa

Final Tally: 4 Allstar Level Players (1 HOF, 1 MVP, 6 combined Allstar Selections)

Coaching: Steve Kerr (rookie coach)


Looks like the Celtics have the edge not just in total # of Allstar level players, but the level of said players. Whatever the Celtics lacked in youth or players being slightly past their primes they made up for in experience (been there done that) that the Warriors currently lack. And btw, Rasheed's last Allstar selection was in 2008 (only two years prior), before you try to discredit me including him as an Allstar level player. :pimp:

*Edit: Both teams have arguably the two greatest shooters of all time. The difference? One of them is the Warriors best player, while the other one is the Celtics 3rd option. Shows how stacked those Celtics teams really were. :bowdown:

[DMAVS41]

Is it really a double standard when you feel one team plays a worse brand of basketball...regardless of competition?

No.

It is if you base your reasoning on their performance in the finals though....that is the double standard.

Most posters are going on and on about how an All Time Great Team wouldn't struggle against a team like this Cavs team. And that doesn't make sense if you don't hold other teams to the same standard.

Also, what is it about their brand of basketball you don't like?

[34-24 Footwork]

To be truthful, there's nothing worse than Kobe not getting credit for beating a PRIME JR Smith/PRIME Melo, Yao Ming/Prime Artest/ Shane Battier, PRIME Deron Williams/Kirilenko, consistent Spurs and high powered Suns.....

...and he doesn't get credit because he beat the teams that came out of the eastern conference.


Talk about reaching, logical fallacy and revisionist history.



Kobe haters mention Kobe finals performances with Shaq but don't mention he LED the team to the Finals so Shaq could eat Keith Van Horn, Rick Smits and Mutombo alive.

With Kobe as the main guy and leading the team in the FINALS 2008-2010, they STILL pretend like the western conference doesnt exist. Lol.

I'm not sure that this Warriors team beats 2009 Melo, JR, Nene and company, to be honest.

[TheMarkMadsen]

To be truthful, there's nothing worse than Kobe not getting credit for beating a PRIME JR Smith/PRIME Melo, Yao Ming/Prime Artest/ Shane Battier, PRIME Deron Williams/Kirilenko, consistent Spurs and high powered Suns.....

...and he doesn't get credit because he beat the teams that came out of the eastern conference.


Talk about reaching, logical fallacy and revisionist history.



Kobe haters mention Kobe finals performances with Shaq but don't mention he LED the team to the Finals so Shaq could eat Keith Van Horn, Rick Smits and Mutombo alive.

With Kobe as the main guy and leading the team in the FINALS 2008-2010, they STILL pretend like the western conference doesnt exist. Lol.

I'm not sure that this Warriors team beats 2009 Melo, JR, Nene and company, to be honest.

which is stupid because out of the 3 finals from 00-02 Kobe played great in the 2 finals he wasn't intentionally injured in

[34-24 Footwork]

which is stupid because out of the 3 finals from 00-02 Kobe played great in the 2 finals he wasn't intentionally injured in


The fact that people mention his numbers against the 2000 Pacers and disregard his numbers against the kings/suns tell me that they haven't watched the games back then and they don't even know who jalen rose is.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

No.

It is if you base your reasoning on their performance in the finals though....that is the double standard.

Most posters are going on and on about how an All Time Great Team wouldn't struggle against a team like this Cavs team. And that doesn't make sense if you don't hold other teams to the same standard.

Also, what is it about their brand of basketball you don't like?

Definitely more than the finals; it's about their fundamental play.

During games 2 and 3, I literally saw the worst shot-selection from a finalist ever. Just jumpshot after jumpshot with no semblance of an offense. Weren't they spotlighted as an ATG offense?

I think it was catch that said it best. Every one of these superstars that's played them....has gone off. Anthony Davis. James Harden. And now even LeBron who prior to game 4 was having a historic finals from an all-around standpoint.

Curry's leadership and lackadaisical play in stretches has been worrisome as well. When good defenses start piling on him, he looks beat. Checked-out even. Before Tony Allen was hurt dude was straight clowning him.

I don't want my star player dragging around like some gimp during the biggest games of the season.

Those are just some of my issues, and while they're not all that glaring, together they're just enough for me to pick the teams I like over them.

[DMAVS41]

Definitely more than the finals; it's about their fundamental play.

During games 2 and 3, I literally saw the worst shot-selection from a finalist ever. Just jumpshot after jumpshot with no semblance of an offense. Weren't they spotlighted as an ATG offense?

I think it was catch that said it best. Every one of these superstars that has played them has gone off. Anthony Davis. James Harden, and now even LeBron who prior to game 4 was having a historic finals from an all-around standpoint.

Curry's leadership and lackadaisical play in stretches has been worrisome as well. When good defenses start piling on him, he looks beat. Checked-out even. Before Tony Allen was hurt dude was straight clowning him.

I don't want my star player dragging around like some gimp during the biggest games of the season.

Those are just some of my issues, and while they're not all that glaring, together they're just enough for me to pick the teams I like over them.


Well, that sounds an awful like a lot about games 2 and 3 in the finals.

Lebron is shooting 47% TS this series while being singled most of the first 3 games. I'd say the Warriors have won that battle decisively so far in this series.

I agree they looked like shit in games 2 and 3, but that is my point...we need to figure out if that was just some bad games or legit issues with this team.

But this is why I can't help but bring up a clear double standard I see. Do you realize how shitty the 09 Lakers looked against the 09 Rockets? How about the 08 Celtics vs the Hawks and Cavs?

I mean...it just reeks of a double standard.

As for Curry...yea, he sucked in 6 straight qtrs and it cost his team hugely. totally agree, but so have other great players.

Curry is wavering 28/5/6 60% TS for the playoffs overall. I mean...I wouldn't write that off so easily.

[34-24 Footwork]

Well, that sounds an awful like a lot about games 2 and 3 in the finals.

Lebron is shooting 47% TS this series while being singled most of the first 3 games. I'd say the Warriors have won that battle decisively so far in this series.

I agree they looked like shit in games 2 and 3, but that is my point...we need to figure out if that was just some bad games or legit issues with this team.

But this is why I can't help but bring up a clear double standard I see. Do you realize how shitty the 09 Lakers looked against the 09 Rockets? How about the 08 Celtics vs the Hawks and Cavs?

I mean...it just reeks of a double standard.

As for Curry...yea, he sucked in 6 straight qtrs and it cost his team hugely. totally agree, but so have other great players.

Curry is wavering 28/5/6 60% TS for the playoffs overall. I mean...I wouldn't write that off so easily.


You know the game, bro. But sometimes it's about the intangibles and things that cant be measured by a metric or statistic. Celtics wouldve bullied Curry and probably Klay.

Can't say the same for Iggy, Barnes, Bogut and Draymond.

You couldn't play pretty basketball with Celtics. You had to beat them at their own game....

[DMAVS41]

You know the game, bro. But sometimes it's about the intangibles and things that cant be measured by a metric or statistic. Celtics wouldve bullied Curry and probably Klay.

Can't say the same for Iggy, Barnes, Bogut and Draymond.

You couldn't play pretty basketball with Celtics. You had to beat them at their own game....

You don't only judge teams by a hypothetical head to head match up. I don't care much about which team is actually better.

I'm more interested in the people saying it's absurd to compare them and the people using clear double standards.

As for the 10 Celtics vs the Warriors in a series. Tough call, and while I agree Klay and Curry would get pushed around, the Warriors are a more versatile team and the Celtics lack of rebounding and shooting would really hurt them here. The Warriors would be able to really stretch out that defense and if they were shooting well...I don't see how the Celtics keep pace as they can't shoot 3's.

Given that the Warriors would have home court and the best player in the series....I'd go with them. Again, assuming we see these Warriors finish off the Cavs in this series.

If this Warriors team loses this series...they obviously have a huge flaw and don't warrant comparisons like this because it would be the worst choke in NBA history probably.

I know that sounds like a lot is riding on just 3 games, but it's just the truth. Everything is on the line...and a great team...or just a good one...gets this series done.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Well, that sounds an awful like a lot about games 2 and 3 in the finals.

Lebron is shooting 47% TS this series while being singled most of the first 3 games. I'd say the Warriors have won that battle decisively so far in this series.

I agree they looked like shit in games 2 and 3, but that is my point...we need to figure out if that was just some bad games or legit issues with this team.

But this is why I can't help but bring up a clear double standard I see. Do you realize how shitty the 09 Lakers looked against the 09 Rockets? How about the 08 Celtics vs the Hawks and Cavs?

I mean...it just reeks of a double standard.

As for Curry...yea, he sucked in 6 straight qtrs and it cost his team hugely. totally agree, but so have other great players.

Curry is wavering 28/5/6 60% TS for the playoffs overall. I mean...I wouldn't write that off so easily.

The double standard would make sense if I hadn't just repeated that its not exclusive to the finals.

Again dude, it's the way the play as a whole. Their style wouldn't be as effective against some of the former champions. Not even close. Depending on the rules, I could see some of the teams I've listed sweeping them.

[DMAVS41]

The double standard would make sense if I hadn't just repeated that its not exclusive to the finals.

Again dude, it's the way the play as a whole. Their style wouldn't be as effective against some of the former champions. Not even close. Depending on the rules, I could see some of the teams I've listed sweeping them.

But you talked an awful lot about the finals and the Memphis series and Harden/Davis...etc.

I'm just pointing out that other teams you listed looked even worse against lesser teams. The Warriors started the playoffs 13-3 after a dominant 67 win season. If we aren't talking about the finals much...I just don't see what you guys are really referencing. And it's not just the record and stuff. They have a top 5 player in the game. Have all nba caliber players. They have a good center. They can play many different ways and win games relying on offense or defense.

I'm not claiming the Warriors are better than some of the best teams ever though.

All I've said is that the 10 Celtics are not clearly a better team. Who knew this would be such a bold claim as literally 7 days ago the entire basketball world would have thought nothing of that claim.

And honestly, I just think games 2 and 3 have really influenced everyone here a lot. Not anything wrong with that....it's either nothing or it's something...and we are about to find out.

But I find it hard to believe that you guys watched this Warriors team all year and came away thinking it's absurd to compare them to the 09/10 Lakers and 10 Celtics. I just don't see any good reason to not think they are as good or better unless we are talking about the finals.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

But you talked an awful lot about the finals and the Memphis series and Harden/Davis...etc.

I'm just pointing out that other teams you listed looked even worse against lesser teams. The Warriors started the playoffs 13-3 after a dominant 67 win season. If we aren't talking about the finals much...I just don't see what you guys are really referencing.

I'm not claiming the Warriors are better than some of the best teams ever though.

All I've said is that the 10 Celtics are not clearly a better team.

And honestly, I just think games 2 and 3 have really influenced everyone here a lot. Not anything wrong with that....it's either nothing or it's something...and we are about to find out.

But I find it hard to believe that you guys watched this Warriors team all year and came away thinking it's absurd to compare them to the 09/10 Lakers and 10 Celtics. I just don't see any good reason to not think they are as good or better unless we are talking about the finals.

Right. I talked about another playoff series against another team separate of the finals.

How they close these finals will definitely change how we view this team historically though. So I wouldn't say they're irrelevant all-together like some posters here. We can agree there.

[DMAVS41]

Right. I talked about another playoff series against another team separate of the finals.

How they close these finals will definitely change how we view this team historically though. So I wouldn't say they're irrelevant all-together like some posters here. We agree there.

Exactly.

Just like nobody really cares that the Lakers had to go to 7 against a depleted Rockets team or the Celtics only went 16-10 in the playoffs and literally were a shot away from potentially being gone fishing.

Sometimes these great teams struggle more to figure themselves out than they do the opponent.

I completely agree that how this finishes really matters a lot. If the Warriors lose...then they don't deserve any such comparison as a great team doesn't lose this series.

If they win easily? I think it's interesting.

Right now I lean towards games 2 and 3 being more of a fluke rather than indicative of flaws in this team.

I don't know though...which is why I said we need to see this play out.

The problem I have is that those 10 Celtics had a lot of known flaws...more than this Warriors team on paper. So I don't see the rationale behind claiming it's not debatable (you aren't, but others did and that is what started this)

[riseagainst]

Kobe's Lakers were always the favorites to the win the series anyway. So obviously after being up 2-1, they were like 99% favorites to win the series.

I remember i saw somewhere on TV that said that the Cavs were only a 52% favorite to win the series even after the 2-1 lead.

:lol

[bballnoob1192]

2010 Celtics honestly getting seriously overrated... 2010-2012 C's were not the 2008 or 2009 C's anymore.. KG declined, everybody getting older..
2010 celtics were still amazing palyoff team. they just phoned it in during the reg season

[Indian guy]

I'll repeat this again:


Thoughts?

Uhh, what in GOD's name does this have to do with Boston's already-mediocre offense further disintegrating in the playoffs, and the reason why they often struggled in the 2nd season?


Yeah the '10 Celtics had already come off a championship and are one of the greatest defenses ever.

Won 50-games in the regular season and failed to win it all against a Laker team in their last relevant season, despite the 6-24 game. Why exactly am I supposed to care about this team again? The exact same roster with a far better regular season was dusted off by LeBron and Wade in 5 games the following season. Agenda-driven LeBron haters/Kobe-di!k suckers need to stop, honestly. The Celtics were simply not THAT great. They were a far more flawed team than this current GSW team, which is why they weren't capable of cruising through their competition and putting the type of numbers GS has done all season. And they have done so against much better competition to boot.


The Warriors are struggling with a D-Level Cavs team.

That D-league roster is still superior to what LeBron had back in 2008. You know, the same team Boston needed 7 games to finish off. Not to mention being taken to 7 games by the 37-win Hawks. What's the biggest knock against GSW - that they lost 2 games to Cleveland with a top 10 ATG in LeBron posting a 40 point triple double? Boo freaking hoo. Not remotely comparable to how ordinary Boston looked for much of the 2008 playoffs.

[DMAVS41]

Uhh, what in GOD's name does this have to do with Boston's already-mediocre offense further disintegrating in the playoffs, and the reason why they often struggled in the 2nd season?



Won 50-games in the regular season and failed to win it all against a Laker team in their last relevant season, despite the 6-24 game. Why exactly am I supposed to care about this team again? The exact same roster with a far better regular season was dusted off by LeBron and Wade in 5 games the following season. Agenda-driven LeBron haters/Kobe-di!k suckers need to stop, honestly. The Celtics were simply not THAT great. They were a far more flawed team than this current GSW team, which is why they weren't capable of cruising through their competition and putting the type of numbers GS has done all season. And they have done so against much better competition to boot.



That D-league roster is still superior to what LeBron had back in 2008. You know, the same team Boston needed 7 games to finish off. Not to mention being taken to 7 games by the 37-win Hawks. What's the biggest knock against GSW - that they lost 2 games to Cleveland with a top 10 ATG in LeBron posting a 40 point triple double? Boo freaking hoo. Not remotely comparable to how ordinary Boston looked for much of the 2008 playoffs.


Very well said. Excellent post.

And I'll add that we are simply talking about what has happened to date. Obviously if the Warriors blow this series....it will dramatically change our tune about them as a team. Someone earlier laughed at that, but I don't follow that logic.

If the Celtics had lost game 7 to the Hawks. Would it not dramatically change our view of that team?

In the playoffs, it's just about winning playoff series honestly. Too many teams we know to be great struggled against weak competition for us to put so much weight on a couple games.

The reason those 08 Celtics are brought up is because we all know they were all time great. They had one of the most talented teams in finals history and really just had it all....so why is it then okay for them to go an anything but dominant 16-10 in the playoffs while this Warriors team is currently 14-5 and it's not okay?

We obviously don't know what is going to happen these next 3 games, but this Warriors team to date is being seriously under-rated. This talk of HOF this and that...doesn't matter. The Warriors have HOF level players and a great coaching staff and are deep and versatile as it gets. They have a guy that before the series...many people were saying they'd take over prime Lebron James. Granted, it was probably trolling or biased Kobe fans saying it, but the point is that a couple games doesn't change all that.

Losing the finals? Yep, that changes all that.

And can we please stop talking about the 10 Celtics as a great team? Like...please. They were old, not deep, couldn't rebound, couldn't shoot 3's, and relied heavily on average players. They were still really really really good, but nothing through the first 100 or so games of the year is evidence that they are on a different level than the Warriors.

In fact, the two teams have a similar talent rating outside of their best player and it's the Warriors that looked better start to present so far.

But oh no....someone has to be an "idiot" according to the morons here to even compare them to that 10 Celtics team. :facepalm

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Uhh, what in GOD's name does this have to do with Boston's already-mediocre offense further disintegrating in the playoffs, and the reason why they often struggled in the 2nd season?

That their "ORTG" was comparable to the Lakers, and the Lakers won the title.

That entire finals was won on defense, by the way. As per Thibs. Just look at game 7.


Won 50-games in the regular season

Cruised through the regular-season, and turned it up in the playoffs as their DRTG depicts. Their ORTG was right there with the Lakers as well.


The exact same roster with a far better regular season was dusted off by LeBron and Wade in 5 games the following season.

Not the same team as already pointed out. In the playoffs, their team defense went down heaps. 100 ---> 103 DRTG. Absurd when you think about it considering what we saw in 2010. Boston's defense not only got better in the playoffs that year, but they could ride the back of Tony Allen who defended the other teams' best perimeter players. The 2011 team didn't have that luxury who along with Allen, were missing Thibs, another key part to their defense.

The 2011 and 2012 variations were weakened by injuries, coaching, and lack of personnel.


That D-league roster is still superior to what LeBron had back in 2008.

You just said they're comparable. Don't backtrack.

Anyway, we'll see how this finals pans out. I'm of the mindset the Warriors need to close the deal somewhat convincingly in order to attain such praise they're being rewarded with ATM.

I love being a non-partisan during this matchup. It's a win-win for me.

[DMAVS41]

That their "ORTG" was comparable to the Lakers, and the Lakers won the title.

That entire finals was won on defense, by the way. As per Thibs. Just look at game 7.



Cruised through the regular-season, and turned it up in the playoffs as their DRTG depicts. Their ORTG was right there with the Lakers as well.



Not the same team as already pointed out. In the playoffs, their team defense went down heaps. 100 ---> 103 DRTG. Absurd when you think about it considering what we saw in 2010. Boston's defense not only got better in the playoffs that year, but they could ride the back of Tony Allen who defended the other teams' best perimeter players. The 2011 team didn't have that luxury who along with Allen, were missing Thibs, another key part to their defense.

The 2011 and 2012 variations were weakened by injuries, coaching, and lack of personnel.



You just said they're comparable. Don't backtrack.

Anyway, we'll see how this finals pans out. I'm of the mindset the Warriors need to close the deal somewhat convincingly in order to attain such praise they're being rewarded with ATM.

I love being a non-partisan during this matchup. It's a win-win for me.


What praise are they getting though? All I've heard is people saying an old, broken down, no shooting, no rebounding, heavy Perkins/Big Baby.....Celtics team that choked away the last 2 games of the finals with Kobe having one of the worst games in finals history....is clearly better than they are.

I don't see anyone heaping praise onto the Warriors...

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

For one, the poster I've been quoting has already claimed their an ATG team. ISH has overrated them massively with regards to their historical ranking.

This finals will speak volumes though. For all parties. :cheers:

[ArbitraryWater]

kuniva just making brainless claims, Indian guy absolutely shut it down.

[DMAVS41]

For one, the poster I've been quoting has already claimed their an ATG team. ISH has overrated them massively with regards to their historical ranking.

This finals will speak volumes though. For all parties. :cheers:

But nobody is going to call them all time great if they don't win. So yes, it will tell us more information, but nobody is going to argue about it if they lose.

But how are they being massively over-rated? They are being debated currently in this thread against a team that didn't win the title in 2010 and won 50 games and had serious flaws.

How is that over-rating them?

[catch24]

My lawd, the Bron stans are shook. Finals aren't even over and they're acting as if they already lost. :oldlol:

[Indian guy]

That their "ORTG" was comparable to the Lakers, and the Lakers won the title.

The Lakers have nothing to do with this. This is about Boston's mediocrity on offense, why it prevented them from being a consistently great team, and why they're inferior to GS, a 2-way monster, because of it.


That entire finals was won on defense, by the way. As per Thibs. Just look at game 7.

Of course. When both teams suck on offense, it becomes about "defense". If Boston could actually put the ball in the hole, they would've won the championship. But they lost, with the opposition's best player going 6-24 in the deciding game. Their offense is what cost them the championship. When you rank 12 out of 16 teams on one side of the floor, that means you have a massive weakness as a team.


Cruised through the regular-season, and turned it up in the playoffs as their DRTG depicts.

Their defense was fine in the regular season - ranking 5th(+4 over league average). Their mediocre offense was the problem all season, and it proved to be their undoing in the Finals against a mediocre offense in LA itself too.


but they could ride the back of Tony Allen who defended the other teams' best perimeter players.

Dude, Tony Allen averaged 16 mpg off the bench that season. He was not the integral part of their defense you are making him out to be.


were missing Thibs, another key part to their defense.

Boston ranked 2nd on D in 2011, and were actually 4 points better on that end of the floor than in 2010. Doesn't seem like they were missing Thibs.


The 2011 and 2012 variations were weakened by injuries, coaching, and lack of personnel.

You have to be ****ing kidding me. It was the same exact core with a slight variation in role players. They lost 'Sheed, Nate and Allen and replaced them with JO, Jeff Green and Delonte West. The difference between 2010 and 2011 is Miami was quite a bit better than anyone they faced in 2010.


You just said they're comparable. Don't backtrack.

I called them comparable with a slight edge to 2015. If Boston was taken to 7 games by the 2008 team, then how the heck would they dismantle the 2015 team?


Anyway, we'll see how this finals pans out. I'm of the mindset the Warriors need to close the deal somewhat convincingly in order to attain such praise they're being rewarded with ATM.

They just need to win. Great teams are judged on 1) their regular season record 2) their talent and 3) whether they won the championship. How one looks while winning it all has never mattered. Otherwise, people wouldn't be on 2008 Boston's dick. If GS wins 2 more games in this series, they'll be celebrated as an ATG.


I love being a non-partisan during this matchup. It's a win-win for me.

Good lord :oldlol:

You are one of the biggest LeBron trolls on this site. Non-partisan? Bwahahaha. Have some shame, man.

[ArbitraryWater]

Wait a minute... both the 2008 Celtics and 2015 Warriors have ATG regular seasons in terms of wins, the Warriors have the upper hand in virtually all advanced team statistics, such as point differential/scoring margin, they did this all in a quite clearly superior conference...

they have lost less games in the playoffs than the Celtics did, again, with the Grizzlies and Rockets two teams beaten that are superior to any team the Celtics did in their 2008 East... whats the issue here?

They actually have MORE playoff experience as a unit than the 2008 Celtics, who were a new formed team, and KG/Pierce/Allen couldn't reach a post-season for years before coming together...

this double standart is too blatant to not be seen.

The 37-win Joe Johnson Hawks? The 2008 Cavaliers with LeBron in his worst series ever, and a sidekick of, Big Z? 7 games?

Laughable double standart... 'not comparable doe'... 'Celtics much better doe'...

[pauk]

Are you maybe trying to say Kobe would won over GSW with this supporting cast?
Better yet even reached the Finals?
Better yet even survived the 1st round?
Better yet even reached the playoffs?

[Wade's Rings]

Are you maybe trying to say Kobe would won over GSW with this supporting cast?
Better yet even reached the Finals?
Better yet even survived the 1st round?
Better yet even reached the playoffs?

Kyrie and Love were healthy in the regular season and the 1st round.

[Indian guy]

they have lost less games in the playoffs than the Celtics did, again, with the Grizzlies and Rockets two teams beaten that are superior to any team the Celtics did in their 2008 East... whats the issue here?

This issue is the same as always - shook MJ/Kobe fans must undermine LeBron's accomplishments at all costs, all logic and facts be damned.

There's no actual basketball reason to consider Boston superior to the current GS team. GS has the best player, the best depth, superior coaching, superior record and superior numbers in every way - all in the superior conference. But Boston was better because LeBron scares the **** out of me!!!!!1

[catch24]

Wait a minute... both the 2008 Celtics and 2015 Warriors have ATG regular seasons in terms of wins, the Warriors have the upper hand in virtually all advanced team statistics, such as point differential/scoring margin, they did this all in a quite clearly superior conference...

Many teams of the modern era have better advanced stats than those of yesteryear. Including the playoff fodder.

How would you distinguish between them if we are going off these stats which seemingly change every year the league does?

:hammerhead:

[ArbitraryWater]

Many teams of the modern era have better advanced stats than those of yesteryear. Including the playoff fodder.

How would you distinguish between them if we are going off these stats which seemingly change every year the league does?

:hammerhead:

then this discussion all together is useless... rank them against their competition THAT year, thats what we're doing, so whats the damn issue here? Did the Celtics go 7 games against a 37-win and 45-win team? Yes they did.... Isn't it also quite obvious that the 2015 West is better than the 2008 East? Why do you people have to be so damn stubborn and dumb?

I'm guessing its


This issue is the same as always - shook MJ/Kobe fans must undermine LeBron's accomplishments at all costs, all logic and facts be damned.

There's no actual basketball reason to consider Boston superior to the current GS team. GS has the best player, the best depth, superior coaching, superior record and superior numbers in every way - all in the superior conference. But Boston was better because LeBron scares the **** out of me!!!!!1

[pauk]

Kyrie and Love were healthy in the regular season and the 1st round.

Gasol, Dwight, Artest, Nash etc. were healthy in the regular season and 1st round aswell.... So was Kobe's defending champion team in 2011.... so was 2004.... so was.............

Now you ask him to "Not lose after taking a 2-1 lead in the Finals"? Considering he is in the West, he would have met GSW in the WCF and wouldnt even be in the Finals.... even with healthy Love/Irving.... I speak from what i have seen from Kobe during his entire career, he is not known as a guy who does the most with the least to a Lebrons or Hakeems or Jordans level or something.... I respect Kobe, he is in my top 10 and all that.... but as an individual talent when thinking of impact / doing the most with the least i think he has been the worst in that department compared to any of those other 9 players in the all-time list... especially when compared to Lebron, who has overachieved like hell with bad teams...

[catch24]

then this discussion all together is useless... rank them against their competition THAT year, thats what we're doing, so whats the damn issue here? Did the Celtics go 7 games against a 37-win and 45-win team? Yes they did.... Isn't it also quite obvious that the 2015 West is better than the 2008 East? Why do you people have to be so damn stubborn and dumb?

I'm guessing its

My problem is with people needing 2 or 3 games in this finals to tell us who the better team between them and '08 Boston was.

The Celtics had Doc/Thibs - yet the Warriors have better coaching?
The Celtics had Ray/KG/Pierce - last year of the their primes - the Warriors have a better core though?
The Celtics have Tony Allen/Perkins/KG/Allen as their best defensemen - yet the Warriors have better defenders?

It doesn't add up. The only logical explanation is LeBron fans propping this Warriors team up, so they can shit on Kobe's competition. An excuse built-in. Been that way since the test of time on these forums.

[DMAVS41]

My problem is with people needing 2 or 3 games in this finals to tell us who the better team between them and '08 Boston was.

The Celtics had Doc/Thibs - yet the Warriors have better coaching?
The Celtics had Ray/KG/Pierce - last year of the their primes - the Warriors have a better core though?
The Celtics have Tony Allen/Perkins/KG/Allen as their best defensemen - yet the Warriors have better defenders?

It doesn't add up. The only logical explanation is LeBron fans propping this Warriors team up, so they can shit on Kobe's competition. An excuse built-in. Been that way since the test of time on these forums.

Well, for starters, the debate was never 08 Celtics vs 15 Warriors.

But think about your 2 to 3 games thing.

Are you saying you'd take the 08 Celtics over the current Warriors if they had lost game 7 in Atlanta in round 1? Please answer this.

[ArbitraryWater]

The Warriors have very easily the better offense, and the Celtics defenders being KG/Perkins... this now blows away Bogut/Green/Thompson/Igoudala? Are you kidding me? You guys are just listing a bunch of names, with your awkward core/defensive men breakdown... Warriors have the #1 defense in the NBA, regular season and playoffs.

Bogut is the best rim protector and post defender in the NBA... GSW has TWO former all-stars coming off the bench, one playing like one right now.

If we don't need these 2-3 finals games, what is it? GSW has garnered more wins in both regular season and playoffs so far, against superior teams? :confusedshrug:

The evidence points towards GSW, but Kobe fans somehow manage to do it again.... tunnel vision, refuse to go with sound logic.. always been that way, lets downplay anything and everything that somehow, someway, relates to LeBron James.

[catch24]

Yes, Kobe fans are the ones who want to downplay the Warriors yet you idiots have the gall to claim they're already better than 2008 Celtics.

Trolls are the absolute worst. :oldlol:

[Wade's Rings]

Gasol, Dwight, Artest, Nash etc. were healthy in the regular season and 1st round aswell.... So was Kobe's defending champion team in 2011.... so was 2004.... so was.............

Now you ask him to "Not lose after taking a 2-1 lead in the Finals"? Considering he is in the West, he would have met GSW in the WCF and wouldnt even be in the Finals.... even with healthy Love/Irving.... I speak from what i have seen from Kobe during his entire career, he is not known as a guy who does the most with the least to a Lebrons or Hakeems or Jordans level or something.... I respect Kobe, he is in my top 10 and all that.... but as an individual talent when thinking of impact / doing the most with the least i think he has been the worst in that department compared to any of those other 9 players in the all-time list... especially when compared to Lebron, who has overachieved like hell with bad teams...

I do think in the East with a healthy love and Irving he gets past the 1st Round. I'm not sure if he would be able to beat the Chicago and/or Atlanta.

[ArbitraryWater]

^

I'm pointing fingers at you, catch24.. laughing at you... know why? Cause you resemble 90% of the Kobetard nation there is... just brainless 1-2 lines posts, bunch of smileys, no actual reason but hyperbole, only... 'lololol omg you think this/that, no reason to even talk' of course not, looking into the face of reality is tough.

[Indian guy]

My problem is with people needing 2 or 3 games in this finals to tell us who the better team between them and '08 Boston was.

It's quite the opposite, actually. People are using 2-3 games in the current NBA finals to undermine GS' body of work this season. And if we are going to let a few playoff games do that, then it's mighty hypocritical to ignore how ordinary Boston looked through the first 2 rounds of the '08 playoffs.


The Celtics had Doc/Thibs - yet the Warriors have better coaching?

Why exactly is Doc Rivers being held in such high esteem again? Last I checked, he was being trashed left and right for blowing that 3-1 lead against Houston. And was leading Boston to the lottery every year prior to KG and Ray's arrival. Steve Kerr on the other hand turned a 50-win team into one of the ATGs. And if we are going to throw Thibs' name around, then GS too has 2 of the best assistant coaches in the league in Gentry and Ron Adams.


The Celtics had Ray/KG/Pierce - last year of the their primes - the Warriors have a better core though?

KG was 32 years old by the time the 2008 season ended. Ray was 33 and Pierce was 30. They were definitely not in their primes. And in 2010, Ray/KG/PP were 35/34/32 years old. Not even close to being in their prime. Give me the MVP and GS' unlimited depth any day. There's a reason why they are the best on both ends of the floor while Boston was completely dependent on a great D to win. GS can beat you in a lot more ways.


The only logical explanation is LeBron fans propping this Warriors team up

Nobody "needs" to prop up GS in comparison to Boston, their own historical play so far this season does that. It's the LeBron-fearing Kobe fans who're undermining GS and making Boston out to be something they weren't.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The Lakers have nothing to do with this. This is about Boston's mediocrity on offense, why it prevented them from being a consistently great team, and why they're inferior to GS, a 2-way monster, because of it.

Sure they do. LA was a "2-way monster" as well until they matched up with Boston, one of the greatest defenses ever.


Of course. When both teams suck on offense, it becomes about "defense".

You can't put the "ball in the hole" if the other teams defense is ATG. The Warriors team would see the same fate. Prior to game 4, they struggled to score against a D-Level Cavs team who on the defensive end are lightweight compared to Boston.


Their defense was fine in the regular season - ranking 5th(+4 over league average). Their mediocre offense was the problem all season, and it proved to be their undoing in the Finals against a mediocre offense in LA itself too.

Their defense got even better, at a historic level, during the postseason. On offense, they were only percentage points off of the Lakers, a team led by offensive juggernauts at their position, Kobe/Pau.


Boston ranked 2nd on D in 2011, and were actually 4 points better on that end of the floor than in 2010. Doesn't seem like they were missing Thibs.

And were worse in the playoffs. A lot worse. 100 --> 103 DRTG.

In 2010, they had one of the greatest volume-to-DRTG's in history.

Thibs and TA were sorely needed.


You have to be ****ing kidding me. It was the same exact core with a slight variation in role players.

Older and broken down with weaker coaching, defenders and offense. They were ranked 18th in offense that year and were worse, defensively, in the playoffs. Much worse.


Good lord :oldlol:

You are one of the biggest LeBron trolls on this site. Non-partisan? Bwahahaha. Have some shame, man.

Says the guy with the LeBron avatar. The hypocrisy is surreal. :oldlol:

[ArbitraryWater]

Rivers been deemed overrated since 2013, 2012? Suddenly when the discussion revolves around LeBron, he's back to 'ATG coach'... why am I not surprised... catch24, slap yourself.

[catch24]

KG was 32 years old by the time the 2008 season ended

This right here tells me all I need to know. After the finals, KG was considered arguably the best player in the league along with Kobe and CP - and easily the games best defender.

LeBron fans are literally obsessed with their anti Kobe agenda. It's pathetic. :oldlol:

[catch24]

Rivers been deemed overrated since 2013, 2012? Suddenly when the discussion revolves around LeBron, he's back to 'ATG coach'... why am I not surprised... catch24, slap yourself.

Who are you again? As bad as their agendas are, I'm talking with OG's on this forum.

Make a name for yourself elsewhere.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Who are you again? As bad as their agendas are, I'm talking with OG's on this forum.

Make a name for yourself elsewhere.

:roll:

[ArbitraryWater]

Mighty one keeps calling this Cavs team 'd level', completely avoiding the factual bits telling us that this 'd league Cavs team' is every bit as talented as the 2008 Hawks and Cavaliers :lol

Nothing of this resembles LeBron agenda... its just a few folks blocking out evidene, going with awkward 'core' breakdowns, using 12th man Tony Allen as reason to perimeter defense, ignoring the GSW 'core' from the previous years, their depth in two former all-stars off the bench, with 4 top 30 players, and the fact they've won more games against better teams...

67-15 record
#2 Offense
#1 Defense
+10.1 Point Differential/Scoring Margin
Rank 1st on BOTH ends in the playoffs
2 home L's all season (would have HCA)
One of the best 3 point shooting teams ever
Best Bench

catch24, take your shitty ass of ISH again. You're not made for this.

[DMAVS41]

Yes, Kobe fans are the ones who want to downplay the Warriors yet you idiots have the gall to claim they're already better than 2008 Celtics.

Trolls are the absolute worst. :oldlol:

I haven't said that actually.

Please answer the question.

Are you saying you'd take the 08 Celtics over the current Warriors if they had lost game 7 in Atlanta in round 1? Please answer this.

[Indian guy]

Sure they do. LA was a "2-way monster" as well

Ummm, no. Lakers had a down year on offense in 2010, going from top 5 the prior 2 seasons to #11 and barely over league average in 2010. They were actually having some serious trouble putting the ball in the hole that year.


Prior to game 4, they struggled to score against a D-Level Cavs team who on the defensive end are lightweight compared to Boston.

This current Cavs roster, while very limited offensively, has a lot of darn good defenders. Legit rim protector in Mozgov, elite rebounder in Thompson and 3 excellent perimeter defenders in LeBron, Shumpert and Delly. GS aren't exactly struggling against scrubs here. Cleveland has a lot of defensive talent. Mind you, despite their struggles in this series, GS still ranks #1 in postseason ORTG.


Their defense got even better, at a historic level, during the postseason. On offense, they were only percentage points off of the Lakers

There you go again, comparing them to a mediocre offense like LA's and pretending like all is OK :oldlol:. Give it up, bro. All numbers indicate Boston was a super-blah offensive team with their over-dependence on old jump shooters. It is the reason why they could never be a dominant team like GS.


They were ranked 18th in offense that year

From 15th the year prior. Ooh, big difference. They must have been missing Thibs' and Tony Allen's offensive contributions! :rolleyes:. Their postseason ORTG was actually better in 2011 than 2010. And they were a little worse defensively in the playoffs than 2010(but much better in the 82 game regular season), but that's what happens when you go up against better competition. Miami were an elite offense and better than anything Boston faced in 2010.


Says the guy with the LeBron avatar. The hypocrisy is surreal. :oldlol:

Except, unlike you - a well known LeBron hater, I'm not pretending to be some impartial viewer.

[ArbitraryWater]

I haven't said that actually.

Please answer the question.

Are you saying you'd take the 08 Celtics over the current Warriors if they had lost game 7 in Atlanta in round 1? Please answer this.

catch24 still has alot to catch up with...


It's quite the opposite, actually. People are using 2-3 games in the current NBA finals to undermine GS' body of work this season. And if we are going to let a few playoff games do that, then it's mighty hypocritical to ignore how ordinary Boston looked through the first 2 rounds of the '08 playoffs.



Why exactly is Doc Rivers being held in such high esteem again? Last I checked, he was being trashed left and right for blowing that 3-1 lead against Houston. And was leading Boston to the lottery every year prior to KG and Ray's arrival. Steve Kerr on the other hand turned a 50-win team into one of the ATGs. And if we are going to throw Thibs' name around, then GS too has 2 of the best assistant coaches in the league in Gentry and Ron Adams.



KG was 32 years old by the time the 2008 season ended. Ray was 33 and Pierce was 30. They were definitely not in their primes. And in 2010, Ray/KG/PP were 35/34/32 years old. Not even close to being in their prime. Give me the MVP and GS' unlimited depth any day. There's a reason why they are the best on both ends of the floor while Boston was completely dependent on a great D to win. GS can beat you in a lot more ways.



Nobody "needs" to prop up GS in comparison to Boston, their own historical play so far this season does that. It's the LeBron-fearing Kobe fans who're undermining GS and making Boston out to be something they weren't.

his response here was ignoring 80% of the post and going with 'this right here tells me all I need to know...' :roll:

[catch24]

I haven't said that actually.

Please answer the question.

Are you saying you'd take the 08 Celtics over the current Warriors if they had lost game 7 in Atlanta in round 1? Please answer this.

I wasn't referring to you personally.

Boston was never threatened by Atlanta. They had homecourt and were losing games on the road to a team they clearly were playing down to. If game-thread were still up, you could see everybody here saying the same thing. They took the Hawks team for granted.

This is obvious because of what they did to LA in the finals, the guys who were favorites to actually win the damn thing.

The way they play is all that matters. Flawed stats from different eras don't mean anything. If I wanted to I could claim the Washington Wizards in 2003 were better than the Championship Bulls teams because of their defensive-rating.

Its non-sense.

[DMAVS41]

I wasn't referring to you personally.

Boston was never threatened by Atlanta. They had homecourt and were losing games on the road to a team they clearly were playing down to. If game-thread were still up, you could see everybody here saying the same thing. They took the Hawks team for granted.

This is obvious because of what they did to LA in the finals, the guys who were favorites to actually win the damn thing.

The way they play is all that matters. Flawed stats from different eras don't mean anything. If I wanted to I could claim the Washington Wizards in 2003 were better than the Championship Bulls teams because of their defensive-rating.

Its non-sense.

The bold makes no sense. The Celtics were dreadful early in the playoffs. They were playing horribly.

And you didn't answer the question I asked. You dodged it.

Which is telling...because it is supposed to show you that all this stuff is fragile. You keep going on about how 2 games should not matter that much, but you are failing to realize that the Celtics were 1 game away from being done in round 1 vs a 37 win team.

And if that doesn't mean anything...they were literally a shot away from being done in round 2 vs a weaker team than this Cavs team.

So you see? Your take makes no sense here.

Who is only using stats? We are saying you have a double standard....and it's the clearest thing ever. Somehow it's okay for the 08 Celtics to nearly lose to worse teams than this Cavs team....but it's not okay for the Warriors to lose 2 games. And to make it worse...you are using it as evidence that the 08 were way better. And then you are going as far as to say it's "idiotic" to compare the Warriors to the 10 Celtics (a much worse version of the Celtics than they were i 08?

Are you serious?

[Doranku]

Who are you again? As bad as their agendas are, I'm talking with OG's on this forum.

Make a name for yourself elsewhere.
:roll: F*ck I didn't see this coming at all, spit my water everywhere.

[catch24]

The bold makes no sense. The Celtics were dreadful early in the playoffs. They were playing horribly.

People keep referencing the Hawks, but fail to mention all the injuries that ravished that team. Their bench was depleted all year, and were incapable of producing a consistent starting 5 because of that. Their record was not indacitive of how good they actually were.

Even still, Boston clearly played down to their competition.


And you didn't answer the question I asked. You dodged it.

I've already stated that I don't follow your narrative. The way the play, during their respective time frame, is all that matters.

Boston was more impressive than this Warriors team. Their core themselves was MUCH more impressive.

[HOoopCityJones]

Who are you again? As bad as their agendas are, I'm talking with OG's on this forum.

Make a name for yourself elsewhere.

http://31.media.tumblr.com/8008269622673ccf5cc4053d029c8992/tumblr_mr5ybfzh8F1qzc065o1_500.gif

[brownmamba00]

The bold makes no sense. The Celtics were dreadful early in the playoffs. They were playing horribly.

And you didn't answer the question I asked. You dodged it.

Which is telling...because it is supposed to show you that all this stuff is fragile. You keep going on about how 2 games should not matter that much, but you are failing to realize that the Celtics were 1 game away from being done in round 1 vs a 37 win team.

And if that doesn't mean anything...they were literally a shot away from being done in round 2 vs a weaker team than this Cavs team.

So you see? Your take makes no sense here.

Who is only using stats? We are saying you have a double standard....and it's the clearest thing ever. Somehow it's okay for the 08 Celtics to nearly lose to worse teams than this Cavs team....but it's not okay for the Warriors to lose 2 games. And to make it worse...you are using it as evidence that the 08 were way better. And then you are going as far as to say it's "idiotic" to compare the Warriors to the 10 Celtics (a much worse version of the Celtics than they were i 08?

Are you serious?
the finals(and conference finals) are where teams and players make their legacies.

not the first round of the playoffs against the Hawks.

I doubt the GS could've even won 2 games against those Boston teams in an hypothetical finals matchup ('08 and '10)

[DMAVS41]

People keep referencing the Hawks, but fail to mention all the injuries that ravished that team. Their bench was depleted all year, and were incapable of producing a consistent starting 5 because of that. Their record was not indacitive of how good they actually were.

Even still, Boston clearly played down to their competition.



I've already stated that I don't follow your narrative. The way the play, during their respective time frame, is all that matters.

Boston was more impressive than this Warriors team. Their core themselves was MUCH more impressive.


Sigh...you aren't following this.

For starters, this Cavs team is way better than that Hawks team...and if the Warriors win the next two games...you could say the same thing about them.

Now, the 08 Celtics were a more impressive team, but remember, that isn't what the real debate is about. The real debate is 10 vs 15. We bring up the 08 Celtics to show you your double standard.

Now, the 10 Celtics were absolutely not more impressive than this Warriors team for the first 98 games of the season. It's not stats at all...it's just reality. The 10 Celtics were an old, slowed down, no rebounding, inept offense, no 3 point shooting team that heavily relied on Perkins/Big Baby....a team that won 50 games...a team that lost a 3-2 lead in the finals and lost game 7 despite the opposing star player playing one of his worst games ever.

If you think that 10 Celtics team was "MUCH more impressive" than the Warriors have been through first 98 games of the season....you just don't know the game or are lying.

And if you base it off games 2 and 3 in the finals largely...you are using a clear double standard you don't apply to teams like the 09 Lakers and 08 Celtics.

You follow?

[ArbitraryWater]

moe just killed this thread while not even participating


laker fans hype big 3 celtics more than boston does


has nothing to do with propping up kobe. Pure coincidence

:roll: :roll:


Boston was more impressive than this Warriors team. Their core themselves was MUCH more impressive.

thanks, we're just waiting on you to finally deliver evidence on that, something that goes further than "core bro!"

Boston loses, 'played down to their competition'... easy to argue like a retard.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Ummm, no. Lakers had a down year on offense in 2010, going from top 5 the prior 2 seasons to #11 and barely over league average in 2010. They were actually having some serious trouble putting the ball in the hole that year.

Which is still great when you factor in Bryant's injuries. They were one of the 4 best teams via ORTG in the postseason, and really about 2 when we consider Denver and Utah as first-round exits.


There you go again, comparing them to a mediocre offense like LA's and pretending like all is OK. Give it up, bro. All numbers indicate Boston was a super-blah offensive team with their over-dependence on old jump shooters. It is the reason why they could never be a dominant team like GS.

Top 4 in the playoffs and ~2 when we consider the playoff fodder in the first round. You guys are out of excuses. :oldlol:


From 15th the year prior. Ooh, big difference. They must have been missing Thibs' and Tony Allen's offensive contributions!

Stats suggest there was a big difference in the postseason

:confusedshrug:


Except, unlike you - a well known LeBron hater, I'm not pretending to be some impartial viewer.

I've given him props this finals. Beyond his scoring, dude's played the all-around game at its finest. You probably missed that though because you're the guy who would lick LeBron's asshole if given the chance.

[DMAVS41]

the finals(and conference finals) are where teams and players make their legacies.

not the first round of the playoffs against the Hawks.

I doubt the GS could've even won 2 games against those Boston teams in an hypothetical finals matchup ('08 and '10)

I think the 08 Celtics were better.

The 10 Celtics...this Warriors team couldn't win 2 games? Just no. My god...that 10 Celtics team had so many flaws. Really good team? Hell yea...but you guys are going way too far.

[HOoopCityJones]

moe just killed this thread while not even participating





:roll: :roll:



thanks, we're just waiting on you to finally deliver evidence on that, something that goes further than "core bro!"

Boston loses, 'played down to their competition'... easy to argue like a retard.

Why did you quote a post by moe that wasn't even said in this thread? :biggums:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Why did you quote a post by moe that wasn't even said in this thread? :biggums:

LOL arb is desperate AF. Reminds me of that thread where I think it was gts who called him Martin, the chiwawa. Mofo just nipping at other peoples heels for that attention.

Catch bodied you bruh. We still love ya tho :cheers:

[HOoopCityJones]

LOL arb is desperate AF. Reminds me of that thread where I think it was gts who called him Martin, the chiwawa. Mofo just nipping at other peoples heels for that attention.

Catch bodied you bruh. We still love ya tho :cheers:

https://i.imgur.com/5ZuqpGn.gif

He put that ni99a to sleep :oldlol:

[Milbuck]

Who are you again? As bad as their agendas are, I'm talking with OG's on this forum.

Make a name for yourself elsewhere.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

[ArbitraryWater]

LOL arb is desperate AF. Reminds me of that thread where I think it was gts who called him Martin, the chiwawa. Mofo just nipping at other peoples heels for that attention.

Catch bodied you bruh. We still love ya tho :cheers:

the hell? You actually remember his dogs name? weird..

who cares where moe posted it anyway, its directed at this very thread and the posts made here, again, something you guys keep losing track off, go to the first opportunity for irrelevant remarks, keep circle jerking, y'all :cheers:

[Milbuck]

:roll:
:roll:

[ArbitraryWater]

Some brain dead Jan 2014s here, not realizing they're laughing at a joke that goes against them just as much :facepalm

[brownmamba00]

I think the 08 Celtics were better.

The 10 Celtics...this Warriors team couldn't win 2 games? Just no. My god...that 10 Celtics team had so many flaws.
they had nagging injuries that year iirc...but they still won 50 games tho:confusedshrug:

and they were turnt up come playoff time;

the '10 Celtics beated both of James and Wade in their prime relatively easy (4-1, 4-2)

they almost swept the defending conference champs Orlando.

and took Kobe's Lakers to the brink of elimination to only lose game 7 in the Staples.

I hate Boston as much as the next guy but I don't these so so Warriors winning a single game in the Garden against those guys.

[HOoopCityJones]

the hell? You actually remember his dogs name? weird..

who cares were moe posted it anyway, its directed at this very thread and the posts made here, again, something you guys keep losing track off, go to the first opportunity for irrelevant remarks, keep circle jerking, y'all :cheers:

Where*

^Meltdown in progress
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view/478499/glozell-twitter-meltdown-o.gif

[Milbuck]

Some brain dead Jan 2014s here, not realizing they're laughing at a joke that goes against them just as much :facepalm
Jesus christ dude. I keep thinking I need to stop posting...and you have almost 6,000 more posts than me in the same span. Take a shower :oldlol:

[HOoopCityJones]

Jesus christ dude. I keep thinking I need to stop posting...and you have almost 6,000 more posts than me in the same span. Take a shower :oldlol:

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[ArbitraryWater]

Thats funny Milbuck, you try to avoid posting because you're very visibly ashamed of the post count, yet I have you on such a string, I could dictate the way you spent the next hour of your life and have you make 20 more posts :oldlol:

I guess I'm out, once again reduced y'all to unecessary bystanders.. til next time, don't forget the body bag :cheers:

[Milbuck]

Thats funny Milbuck, you try to avoid posting because you're very visibly ashamed of the post count, yet I have you on such a string, I could dictate the way you spent the next hour of your life and have you make 20 more posts :oldlol:

I guess I'm out, once again reduced y'all to unecessary bystanders.. til next time, don't forget the body bag :cheers:
Thanks for the reply bud. Go ahead and respond again.

[HOoopCityJones]

I'll give you one thing , you're the only member here who can royally take it up the ass and walk away acting like it was all by your own design. Ni99as in the penitentiary would love you.

[brownmamba00]

I'll give you one thing , you're the only member here who can royally take it up the ass and walk away acting like it was all by your own design. Ni99as in the penitentiary would love you.
:lol :lol

[Milbuck]

I'll give you one thing , you're the only member here who can royally take it up the ass and walk away acting like it was all by your own design. Ni99as in the penitentiary would love you.
:roll:

[sportjames23]

I'll give you one thing , you're the only member here who can royally take it up the ass and walk away acting like it was all by your own design. Ni99as in the penitentiary would love you.


Damn. :oldlol:

[Stempel, HERB]

Thats funny Milbuck, you try to avoid posting because you're very visibly ashamed of the post count, yet I have you on such a string, I could dictate the way you spent the next hour of your life and have you make 20 more posts :oldlol:

I guess I'm out, once again reduced y'all to unecessary bystanders.. til next time, don't forget the body bag :cheers:


You've never bodybagged anything. You've desperately tried to stand out since joining the site. First, it was high volume, obnoxious troll posts all across the first page of the NBA forum. Nobody gave a shit about you, and you were so insecure that you went crawling into the BTE begging for rep. And, here you are now, puffing your chest out with false confidence, thinking that some charity rep tossed your way by a group of the biggest losers on this site lends some kind of credibility to your dumbshit posts about ball.

Your growth as a poster mirrors a fat chick who was kissed for the very first time. SOMEBODY LIKES MEEEEEEEEE!

[HOoopCityJones]

You've never bodybagged anything. You've desperately tried to stand out since joining the site. First, it was high volume, obnoxious troll posts all across the first page of the NBA forum. Nobody gave a shit about you, and you were so insecure that you went crawling into the BTE begging for rep. And, here you are now, puffing your chest out with false confidence, thinking that some charity rep tossed your way by a group of the biggest losers on this site lends some kind of credibility to your dumbshit posts about ball.

Your growth as a poster mirrors a fat chick who was kissed for the very first time. SOMEBODY LIKES MEEEEEEEEE!

Double Damn :oldlol:

[Milbuck]

You've never bodybagged anything. You've desperately tried to stand out since joining the site. First, it was high volume, obnoxious troll posts all across the first page of the NBA forum. Nobody gave a shit about you, and you were so insecure that you went crawling into the BTE begging for rep. And, here you are now, puffing your chest out with false confidence, thinking that some charity rep tossed your way by a group of the biggest losers on this site lends some kind of credibility to your dumbshit posts about ball.

Your growth as a poster mirrors a fat chick who was kissed for the very first time. SOMEBODY LIKES MEEEEEEEEE!
http://i.imgur.com/5mPQjR9.gif

[sportjames23]

You've never bodybagged anything. You've desperately tried to stand out since joining the site. First, it was high volume, obnoxious troll posts all across the first page of the NBA forum. Nobody gave a shit about you, and you were so insecure that you went crawling into the BTE begging for rep. And, here you are now, puffing your chest out with false confidence, thinking that some charity rep tossed your way by a group of the biggest losers on this site lends some kind of credibility to your dumbshit posts about ball.

Your growth as a poster mirrors a fat chick who was kissed for the very first time. SOMEBODY LIKES MEEEEEEEEE!


Shit. :oldlol:

[Thorn]

You've never bodybagged anything. You've desperately tried to stand out since joining the site. First, it was high volume, obnoxious troll posts all across the first page of the NBA forum. Nobody gave a shit about you, and you were so insecure that you went crawling into the BTE begging for rep. And, here you are now, puffing your chest out with false confidence, thinking that some charity rep tossed your way by a group of the biggest losers on this site lends some kind of credibility to your dumbshit posts about ball.

Your growth as a poster mirrors a fat chick who was kissed for the very first time. SOMEBODY LIKES MEEEEEEEEE!
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eo9IQaNDhtA/UV7vaF91YsI/AAAAAAAAHMM/MDSQYdChyao/s400/Reggie+Evans+React.gif

[Uncle Drew]

LeBron never lost after winning 4 games in the Finals.

[dick tracy]

ofcourse dude won 5 rings but needs

to think about playing for the spurs now:coleman:

[Charlie Sheen]

You've never bodybagged anything. You've desperately tried to stand out since joining the site. First, it was high volume, obnoxious troll posts all across the first page of the NBA forum. Nobody gave a shit about you, and you were so insecure that you went crawling into the BTE begging for rep. And, here you are now, puffing your chest out with false confidence, thinking that some charity rep tossed your way by a group of the biggest losers on this site lends some kind of credibility to your dumbshit posts about ball.

Your growth as a poster mirrors a fat chick who was kissed for the very first time. SOMEBODY LIKES MEEEEEEEEE!

https://33.media.tumblr.com/c00aa1b33bd2a2c2973fabb90d83d7ec/tumblr_nhucelrMKd1snzbj4o1_500.gif

[lakeshow1]

The fact that people mention his numbers against the 2000 Pacers and disregard his numbers against the kings/suns tell me that they haven't watched the games back then and they don't even know who jalen rose is.

This is what makes 99% of the Kobe debate here irrelevant- barely anyone has seen the games in context.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

LeBron never lost after winning 4 games in the Finals.

:oldlol:

[riseagainst]

The Lakers are also always the favorites to win the finals.

[warriorfan]

You've never bodybagged anything. You've desperately tried to stand out since joining the site. First, it was high volume, obnoxious troll posts all across the first page of the NBA forum. Nobody gave a shit about you, and you were so insecure that you went crawling into the BTE begging for rep. And, here you are now, puffing your chest out with false confidence, thinking that some charity rep tossed your way by a group of the biggest losers on this site lends some kind of credibility to your dumbshit posts about ball.

Your growth as a poster mirrors a fat chick who was kissed for the very first time. SOMEBODY LIKES MEEEEEEEEE!

damn

[SwayDizzle]

You've never bodybagged anything. You've desperately tried to stand out since joining the site. First, it was high volume, obnoxious troll posts all across the first page of the NBA forum. Nobody gave a shit about you, and you were so insecure that you went crawling into the BTE begging for rep. And, here you are now, puffing your chest out with false confidence, thinking that some charity rep tossed your way by a group of the biggest losers on this site lends some kind of credibility to your dumbshit posts about ball.

Your growth as a poster mirrors a fat chick who was kissed for the very first time. SOMEBODY LIKES MEEEEEEEEE!
damn

[bluechox2]

LeBron never lost after winning 4 games in the Finals.
he was forced to bang chris bosh after the game if they won..thats why 2 times he lost in miami...first time he wasnt ready and quit, then he went through with it 2 times after, and the last time he said enough and bounced

[Cold soul]

You've never bodybagged anything. You've desperately tried to stand out since joining the site. First, it was high volume, obnoxious troll posts all across the first page of the NBA forum. Nobody gave a shit about you, and you were so insecure that you went crawling into the BTE begging for rep. And, here you are now, puffing your chest out with false confidence, thinking that some charity rep tossed your way by a group of the biggest losers on this site lends some kind of credibility to your dumbshit posts about ball.

Your growth as a poster mirrors a fat chick who was kissed for the very first time. SOMEBODY LIKES MEEEEEEEEE!

http://i.imgur.com/jnIRkOZ.gif

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

http://i.imgur.com/jnIRkOZ.gif

I f*cking love this gif. :oldlol: The usage is appropriate every time..

[sbw19]

Mamba's legacy towering over repeat offenders! :bowdown:

[DMAVS41]

Meh....

This Warriors team is absolutely as good or better than the 10 Celtics. They looked more impressive the entire year outside a handful of games and just won the title.

Each time they got kind of pushed in the playoffs...they ran off 3 straight wins.

They went 67-15 in a brutally tough west and then went 16-5 in the playoffs.

83-20 and the title with one of the deepest and most versatile rosters in recent memory? Yea...sorry....better than the 10 Celtics.

I'm debating leaving ISH...it's gotten so bad that people actually think it's trolling to say what I am above.

A number of posters, in this very thread, claimed it was "idiotic" to compare this Warriors team to the 10 Celtics.

Like really? Hardcore basketball fans have opinions as silly as that? And while this thread was going on...you had tpols and pointguard (granted they are two of the dumbest men alive) arguing strongly that the Cavs were better without Kyrie and Love.

I think it might be time to hang it up...

[unbreakable]

warriors have nothing on the celtics, or any championship team in the last 15 years...

such an overrated team... steph choking in the finals PROVES this warriors team is garbage in the grand scheme of things.. cavs with 2 superstars instead of 1 wouldve destroyed the warriors

[branslowski]

You've never bodybagged anything. You've desperately tried to stand out since joining the site. First, it was high volume, obnoxious troll posts all across the first page of the NBA forum. Nobody gave a shit about you, and you were so insecure that you went crawling into the BTE begging for rep. And, here you are now, puffing your chest out with false confidence, thinking that some charity rep tossed your way by a group of the biggest losers on this site lends some kind of credibility to your dumbshit posts about ball.

Your growth as a poster mirrors a fat chick who was kissed for the very first time. SOMEBODY LIKES MEEEEEEEEE!

Why he do him like that?:biggums:

[Wade3]

Arb's rectum is leaking more blood than Jon Snow in the season finale of GoT

No Vaseline :roll:

[catch24]

warriors have nothing on the celtics

Yup, and while the Warriors impressed me a little more than they did when they were down 2-1, they still proved me right. When you play Curry physically, you can dictate his impact. The Warriors and injury-riddled Cavs were close throughout because of this.

@Dmavs - I apologize if your feelings were hurt, but don't "leave" the forum bro. You're a Mavs fan. I'm a Lakers fan. We simply disagree with our take on 2 other teams - not a big deal honestly. :cheers:

[DMAVS41]

Yup, and while the Warriors impressed me a little more than they did when they were down 2-1, they still proved me right. When you play Curry physically, you can dictate his impact. The Warriors and injury-riddled Cavs were close throughout because of this.

@Dmavs - I apologize if your feelings were hurt, but don't "leave" the forum bro. You're a Mavs fan. I'm a Lakers fan. We simply disagree with our take on 2 other teams - not a big deal honestly. :cheers:

Has nothing to do with "feelings"

It's that the average person here is just so agenda driven or stupid...it's impossible to have a conversation.

You just got done saying you were "proved right"....as if that makes any sense at all.

You got proved right that a team happened to play 6 bad qtrs in the finals and then won easily...that at the first sign of adversity in the playoffs in two separate series they reeled off 6 straight wins?

Again, it's not your opinion isn't valid...it's that your reasoning behind it is invalid. And worse...your take is that it's "idiotic" that a 10 Celtics team with numerous flaws that had an objectively worse season might be on the same level or worse than this 15 Warriors team.

And when we've tried to point out the flaws in your reasoning...you talk about narrative.

You rank the 08 Celtics over both the 10 Celtics and 15 Warriors...yet the main reason you take the 10 Celtics over the 15 Warriors is because of essentially the finals...and really a 6 qtr stretch at that.

But you don't hold the 08 Celtics to the same standard when they played way worse and struggled way more against two inferior teams to these 15 Cavs.

And you don't hold the 09 Lakers to that same standard either when they had to go 7 against a decimated Rockets team worse than these Cavs.


Even with all that...I give you the benefit of the doubt and merely argue that it's debatable. That's all I've really ever said...yea I'd go with the Warriors now after seeing what I expected after games 2 and 3....but all I said was that is was debatable.

And what did you say? Here:

They're not close to the 2010 Celtics. lol.

You don't have a point. Nobody with a brain would rank this soft Warriors team with the Celtics.

You would have to be a serious dope to take this Warriors team over THAT Celtics squad

See?

You are either an idiot and don't know the game and it's history at all...or are so agenda driven it's pointless to talk to.

I'll say it again now that the year is over.

Every single metric you will find...will favor the Warriors here. Everything.

They ranked higher on the talent rating study.

They actually won the title.

They clearly had less flaws as a team.

And even with all that...I agree it's close enough to debate because of what those Celtics were capable of.


So I'll ask you....do you still think the bolded above? Or do you yield?

[SexSymbol]

Meh....

This Warriors team is absolutely as good or better than the 10 Celtics. They looked more impressive the entire year outside a handful of games and just won the title.

Each time they got kind of pushed in the playoffs...they ran off 3 straight wins.

They went 67-15 in a brutally tough west and then went 16-5 in the playoffs.

83-20 and the title with one of the deepest and most versatile rosters in recent memory? Yea...sorry....better than the 10 Celtics.

I'm debating leaving ISH...it's gotten so bad that people actually think it's trolling to say what I am above.

A number of posters, in this very thread, claimed it was "idiotic" to compare this Warriors team to the 10 Celtics.

Like really? Hardcore basketball fans have opinions as silly as that? And while this thread was going on...you had tpols and pointguard (granted they are two of the dumbest men alive) arguing strongly that the Cavs were better without Kyrie and Love.

I think it might be time to hang it up...

Because when facing the Warriors it actually is better, MUCH better I might add.
Delly won them two games basically. They couldn't beat Warriors with offense, we know that, so defense was the way to go, and TT and Delly are a hundred times better defender than Kyrie and Love.
Listen, u put Kyrie on Steph, Steph drops 30-33 every single game, you put love on draygod, draygod will have a much better series than he actually had.
Curry's supporting cast, aside from Iggy, was very lackluster, even on offense, it can be debated that bron's supporting cast was better on offense in at least 4 games of the series and that wouldn't even be a reach, look at the production they were putting, especially considering how selfish lebron was

[ArbitraryWater]

Because when facing the Warriors it actually is better, MUCH better I might add.
Delly won them two games basically. They couldn't beat Warriors with offense, we know that, so defense was the way to go, and TT and Delly are a hundred times better defender than Kyrie and Love.
Listen, u put Kyrie on Steph, Steph drops 30-33 every single game, you put love on draygod, draygod will have a much better series than he actually had.
Curry's supporting cast, aside from Iggy, was very lackluster, even on offense, it can be debated that bron's supporting cast was better on offense in at least 4 games of the series and that wouldn't even be a reach, look at the production they were putting, especially considering how selfish lebron was

so, why can't TT play with Love? Love's and Kyrie's offensive impact is miles above their defensive one.. the only 'sacrifice' would be Delly off the bench, which isn't one, considering how putrid he was outside of one game, dipshit. Can't believe you still repeat this obnoxious and retarded argument.

[Doranku]

I'll give you one thing , you're the only member here who can royally take it up the ass and walk away acting like it was all by your own design. Ni99as in the penitentiary would love you.



You've never bodybagged anything. You've desperately tried to stand out since joining the site. First, it was high volume, obnoxious troll posts all across the first page of the NBA forum. Nobody gave a shit about you, and you were so insecure that you went crawling into the BTE begging for rep. And, here you are now, puffing your chest out with false confidence, thinking that some charity rep tossed your way by a group of the biggest losers on this site lends some kind of credibility to your dumbshit posts about ball.

Your growth as a poster mirrors a fat chick who was kissed for the very first time. SOMEBODY LIKES MEEEEEEEEE!


:roll: I can't believe I never saw this thread. Ruthless.

[SexSymbol]

so, why can't TT play with Love? Love's and Kyrie's offensive impact is miles above their defensive one.. the only 'sacrifice' would be Delly off the bench, which isn't one, considering how putrid he was outside of one game, dipshit. Can't believe you still repeat this obnoxious and retarded argument.
not retarded, not obnoxious, I have made a thread comparing the supporting casts for both lebron and curry, and bron's supporting cast came out on top 4 times out of 6.
Obviously it's miles above their defensive one, they don't play defense at all, and not playing defense against a team in which two main ignitors to the offense are a pg and a pf is dooming your team from the beginning.
They probably are better against every other team, but specifically against warriors love's and Irving's injuries were a blessing in disguise. If for not Lebron playing so damn selfishly with the highest usage of all time and terrible efficiency while playing 1x1, cavs could've taken the series due to their defense, like they did in their two wins.

[ArbitraryWater]

not retarded, not obnoxious, I have made a thread comparing the supporting casts for both lebron and curry, and bron's supporting cast came out on top 4 times out of 6.
Obviously it's miles above their defensive one, they don't play defense at all, and not playing defense against a team in which two main ignitors to the offense are a pg and a pf is dooming your team from the beginning.
They probably are better against every other team, but specifically against warriors love's and Irving's injuries were a blessing in disguise. If for not Lebron playing so damn selfishly with the highest usage of all time and terrible efficiency while playing 1x1, cavs could've taken the series due to their defense, like they did in their two wins.

http://i.gyazo.com/633b322bcd51630897952f8e79d3d2ef.png

[BallsOut]

Thats funny Milbuck, you try to avoid posting because you're very visibly ashamed of the post count, yet I have you on such a string, I could dictate the way you spent the next hour of your life and have you make 20 more posts :oldlol:

I guess I'm out, once again reduced y'all to unecessary bystanders.. til next time, don't forget the body bag :cheers:


I'll give you one thing , you're the only member here who can royally take it up the ass and walk away acting like it was all by your own design. Ni99as in the penitentiary would love you.


You've never bodybagged anything. You've desperately tried to stand out since joining the site. First, it was high volume, obnoxious troll posts all across the first page of the NBA forum. Nobody gave a shit about you, and you were so insecure that you went crawling into the BTE begging for rep. And, here you are now, puffing your chest out with false confidence, thinking that some charity rep tossed your way by a group of the biggest losers on this site lends some kind of credibility to your dumbshit posts about ball.

Your growth as a poster mirrors a fat chick who was kissed for the very first time. SOMEBODY LIKES MEEEEEEEEE!

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

RIP ArbitraryWater aka RocketGreatness

[TheBigVeto]

That's not killer instinct.
That's just another proof he's a frontrunnin beta.