If you take Curry off the Warriors, are they still up 3-2?

[konex]

I would say no. Now, obviously if you take LeBron off the Cavs, they would still be losing.

So why is LeBron more valuable than Curry if GS does manage to win? :confusedshrug:

[aj1987]

I would say no. Now, obviously if you take LeBron off the Cavs, they would still be losing.

So why is LeBron more valuable than Curry if GS does manage to win? :confusedshrug:
If you take LeBron off the Cavs, they'd be in the lottery.

[navy]

If you take Lebron off the Cavs they couldnt crack 70 points vs this Warriors team.

Anyways Curry cemented his fmvp last night. It would take a major collapse on his part to lose it. And I mean major.

[SexSymbol]

GSW would lose this series 0-4 without Curry.

[edrick]

I would say no. Now, obviously if you take LeBron off the Cavs, they would still be losing.

So why is LeBron more valuable than Curry if GS does manage to win? :confusedshrug:

Cavs are shooting 18% with Lebron on the bench.

Only a complete moron would think that Curry is more valuable than Lebron. remember, Curry had two awful games, and both went to OT. Lebron had a bad game, and the Cavs got blown out.

[Fudge]

Without him, no. But if you replaced him with any decent-good starting PG in the league, I think they'd still be up 3-2. PG's like Lawson, Walker, Dragic, and a few others.

[KiiiiNG]

Without him, no. But if you replaced him with any decent-good starting PG in the league, I think they'd still be up 3-2. PG's like Lawson, Walker, Dragic, and a few others.
yup, at least those guys can get to the rim and make something happen.

curry just sits around all game waiting for his team to get the lead so he can chuck up shots that make him look flashy.

a 3 is a 3. i dont ****ing care if hes fading away or standing still and wide open. a 3 is a ****ing 3.

morons care too much about looks than actual substance. curry is a shitty overall player but a great shooter.

it is what it is.

if curry is so great why are they just now competing for a title? he's been around a while right? did he all of a sudden transform as a player THIS year or did they just happen to assemble an incredible team around him with a smart coach? i say the latter.

meanwhile guys like durant and lebron have been in the thick of things since they were 21-22 years old.... because they're actually superstars

[warriorfan]

http://s3.postimg.org/8726flrr7/Meltdown_Fudge_King.jpg

[knicksman]

yup, at least those guys can get to the rim and make something happen.

curry just sits around all game waiting for his team to get the lead so he can chuck up shots that make him look flashy.

a 3 is a 3. i dont ****ing care if hes fading away or standing still and wide open. a 3 is a ****ing 3.

morons care too much about looks than actual substance. curry is a shitty overall player but a great shooter.

it is what it is.

if curry is so great why are they just now competing for a title? he's been around a while right? did he all of a sudden transform as a player THIS year or did they just happen to assemble an incredible team around him with a smart coach? i say the latter.

meanwhile guys like durant and lebron have been in the thick of things since they were 21-22 years old.... because they're actually superstars

bran was 24 when he finally had made his team no. 1 in the conference same with durant and it took them 6 years. Curry is 26 right now but it also took him 6 years. But the difference, durant and lebron werent winning rings at 26 while curry is just 1 win away.

And you have no idea about this game beyond stats if you dont think theres no difference between a spot up three and off the dribble 3. Thats the difference between a kobe and bran. The difference between 2/5 and 5/7