East vs West so far

[TheImmortal]

http://i.imgur.com/xkzMZtL.jpg


78 - 78 a piece.. pretty close.

Source: http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/standings/

[mehyaM24]

the east has undoubtedly gotten better this season.

could you imagine a team like memphis being in the eastern conference? :eek: not sure why the league hasn't calibrated on this issue, after all memphis is geographically closer to the east coast.

[Dresta]

Heat are 8-1 against the West, 8-9 against the East.

Sucks playing in the East.

[DMAVS41]

I think the East has been better so far, but I'm confused...I thought the records between conferences and overall records...etc. didn't matter?

Isn't that what you clowns have been spewing all this time?

Funny how it matters now...right?

[Velocirap31]

78-78 is pretty good considering the West has the Warriors.

[stalkerforlife]

Spurs/Warriors/Clippers

Cavs/shit/shit

I don't care about the records of teams that have ZERO chance at a title.

[ArbitraryWater]

Spurs/Warriors/Clippers

Cavs/shit/shit

I don't care about the records of teams that have ZERO chance at a title.

:yaohappy:

[stalkerforlife]

:yaohappy:

They beat the Spurs last year and lost in a fluke series to the Rockets.

And they are clearly better than any team in the east outside of the Cavs.

[TripleA]

They beat the Spurs last year and lost in a fluke series to the Rockets.

And they are clearly better than any team in the east outside of the Cavs.

Clippers :roll:
I'd take the Heat and Bulls over those clowns.

[mehyaM24]

Clippers :roll:
I'd take the Heat and Bulls over those clowns,

with rose's "double vision"?

nah

the heat are pretty good, but the clippers would beat them in a 7 game series.

[TripleA]

with rose's "double vision"?

nah

the heat are pretty good, but the clippers would beat them in a 7 game series.

Chris Paul is cursed to lose in the second round so if it's in the first I think Clips got it but if it's the second round or more it's over. I also forgot the Pacers Paul George is a beast.

[stalkerforlife]

Clippers :roll:
I'd take the Heat and Bulls over those clowns.

Just no.

[TripleA]

Just no.

Clippers are a joke.
I might have to take the Pacers over them.

[Leroy Jetson]

It goes:

Warriors
spurs


Cavs
Thunder

Clippers

No legit shot for any other team.

[stalkerforlife]

SHIT...

I forgot about OKC.

Spurs/Warriors/OKC/Clippers.

[Young X]

They beat the Spurs last year and lost in a fluke series to the Rockets.

And they are clearly better than any team in the east outside of the Cavs.The Clippers are terrible. They beat the Spurs because they matched up well with them, that doesn't mean they had any chance of winning a title. There's no way that team could've won a championship last season or this season.

And OKC isn't winning a title either. I see people trying to group them into the Spurs/Warriors tier and I'm not buying it. They're not beating either one of those teams in a series.

The Warriors/Spurs/Cavs are ahead of everybody.

[WayOfWade]

The Clippers are terrible. They beat the Spurs because they matched up well with them, that doesn't mean they had any chance of winning a title. There's no way that team could've won a championship last season or this season.

And OKC isn't winning a title either. I see people trying to group them into the Spurs/Warriors tier and I'm not buying it. They're not beating either one of those teams in a series.

The Warriors/Spurs/Cavs are ahead of everybody.
Very well put post. The Clippers were much last year though, much better than they are currently. And as for OKC, they're not in the same tier as GSW or SAS, but they will give either of the two teams trouble come playoff time

[Young X]

Very well put post. The Clippers were much last year though, much better than they are currently. And as for OKC, they're not in the same tier as GSW or SAS, but they will give either of the two teams trouble come playoff timeClippers were better last season but they weren't contenders.

And yeah, OKC isn't in that tier but they can give either one of those 2 teams hell. I don't see them winning 4 games against them though. They don't look like a championship squad to me, but it's still kinda early.

People are getting this sh!t confused. The strength of the west isn't/wasn't about the number of contenders they have. There's only been like 2 championship caliber teams in the west per year. What made the west so good is the 2nd tier teams like Memphis/LAC/HOU that weren't good enough to win it all but could be competitive in any given series. Now those teams suck.

[mehyaM24]

i don't know if the clippers pick up their play, but they probably screwed up their only opportunity at a finals push last season.

chris paul's otherwise scoreless 4th quarter to seal the deal at staples, will forever be a black hole in his legacy.

[DMAVS41]

The Clippers are terrible. They beat the Spurs because they matched up well with them, that doesn't mean they had any chance of winning a title. There's no way that team could've won a championship last season or this season.

And OKC isn't winning a title either. I see people trying to group them into the Spurs/Warriors tier and I'm not buying it. They're not beating either one of those teams in a series.

The Warriors/Spurs/Cavs are ahead of everybody.

Stop it.

We've been over this before...

[Young X]

Stop it.

We've been over this before...Stop what?

[DMAVS41]

Stop what?

Stop saying the 14 and 15 Clippers had absolutely no chance to win.

It's complete and utter bullshit and you know it...

[Young X]

Stop saying the 14 and 15 Clippers had absolutely no chance to win.

It's complete and utter bullshit and you know it...The '15 Clippers had very little no shot at winning a championship. How the hell were they supposed beat Golden State in a 7 game series?

They were NOT a championship caliber team and obviously aren't this season either.

[DMAVS41]

The '15 Clippers had almost no shot at winning a championship. How the hell were they supposed beat Golden State in a 7 game series?

They were NOT a championship caliber team and obviously aren't this season either.

I agree with you about this year...although the playoffs are far away and a lot can change.

14 and 15? Just no...teams that have no chance to win don't perform like they did against the Thunder and Spurs.

Favorites? Of course not.

But saying they had no chance is just ignorant. Just as saying they are terrible is as well.

They aren't "terrible" at all...

[Akhenaten]

Stop saying the 14 and 15 Clippers had absolutely no chance to win.

It's complete and utter bullshit and you know it...

They didn't though wtf? They had 0 shot against GS or Cleveland, maybe a "puncher's chance", but no REAL shot.

[ArbitraryWater]

Stop saying the 14 and 15 Clippers had absolutely no chance to win.

It's complete and utter bullshit and you know it...

Lol thats what I thought of again.. in both series' they were pretty much a few bogus plays or a complete lapse away from going to the WCF, in 2014 having beaten the Thunder and in 2015 the Spurs... but supposedly there was little to no shot at a title. C'mon now.

[DMAVS41]

They didn't though wtf? They had 0 shot against GS or Cleveland, maybe a "puncher's chance", but no REAL shot.

You could say the same thing about them playing the Spurs then...how did they win a series they had no chance to win?

[Young X]

I agree with you about this year...although the playoffs are far away and a lot can change.

14 and 15? Just no...teams that have no chance to win don't perform like they did against the Thunder and Spurs.

Favorites? Of course not.

But saying they had no chance is just ignorant.I'm talking about last season's Clippers only. Was it impossible for them to have won the title? No, but it was extremely unlikely.

There's just no way that team was beating the Warriors in a series. They would've gotten murdered.

People keep confusing really good teams with contender, it's not the same thing. The Clippers were a really good team but they're not capable of realistically winning a championship.

I don't think OKC this season can win it all either from what I've seen, but I'm not 100% sure on them yet. Maybe they'll get to that level in the future.

[ArbitraryWater]

The '15 Clippers had very little no shot at winning a championship. How the hell were they supposed beat Golden State in a 7 game series?

They were NOT a championship caliber team and obviously aren't this season either.

If Harden doesn't turn it over last year in G2 thats a guaranteed minimum 6 game series... the Rockets... but the Clippers have no chance? Against the 20 FIFTEEN Warriors, who were very much beatable? ..

[DMAVS41]

Lol thats what I thought of again.. in both series' they were pretty much a few bogus plays or a complete lapse away from going to the WCF, in 2014 having beaten the Thunder and in 2015 the Spurs... but supposedly there was little to no shot at a title. C'mon now.

Exactly....you can't claim a team that beat the Spurs and should have gone home up 3-2 against the Thunder just had "no chance" to win the title...

It's just stupid.

Nobody is arguing they were the favorites or anything...but they were a contending team.

If they had "no chance"...then too many teams that actually won the title had "no chance"

[mehyaM24]

They didn't though wtf? They had 0 shot against GS or Cleveland, maybe a "puncher's chance", but no REAL shot.

against a kyrie-less and love-less cleveland? they would have been favorites.

the clippers nearly won their first 2 opening road games against houston (and actually won 1) without chris paul even on the floor.

him seemingly going scoreless during the 4th quarter of a close-out game at staples, is a HUGE black-mark on his legacy. i can't stress that enough.

[DMAVS41]

I'm talking about last season's Clippers only. Was it impossible for them to have won the title? No, but it was extremely unlikely.

There's just no way that team was beating the Warriors in a series. They would've gotten murdered.

People keep confusing really good teams with contender, it's not the same thing. The Clippers were a really good team but they're not capable of realistically winning a championship.

I don't think OKC this season can win it all either from what I've seen, but I'm not 100% sure on them yet. Maybe they'll get to that level in the future.

I'm not confusing anything.

There are different levels of contenders....and the Clippers beating the Warriors would be something like a 20% chance if they made the conference finals and were healthy.

I don't view that as virtually impossible...

[Akhenaten]

then too many teams that actually won the title had "no chance"

Like who?

[DMAVS41]

Like who?

11 Mavs
04 Pistons
75 Warriors

[Young X]

I'm not confusing anything.

There are different levels of contenders....and the Clippers beating the Warriors would be something like a 20% chance if they made the conference finals and were healthy.

I don't view that as virtually impossible...9 times outta 10 the Clippers are losing to the Warriors last season. Once again, it's not impossible, but extremely unlikely. They most likely would've gotten killed.

A contending team should be a team you could see winning a championship at the end of the year and not be shocked by it. Going into the playoffs, the Clippers weren't even expected to get past the 1st round. You would've gotten laughed at if you mentioned anything about a championship.

[Akhenaten]

11 Mavs
04 Pistons

Get out of here guy, 04 Pistons has a legit argument for greatest defensive team ever, Clippers are NOWHERE near their level. Mavs had Dirk, this one is more legit because people were saying Dirk would never win but that was more due to his prior personal failings than an indictment of the team.

Once they steamrolled the champion Lakers people stood up and took notice, and no point have the Clippers ever been anywhere near that impressive in any playoff run. Clippers are a joke.

[DMAVS41]

9 times outta 10 the Clippers are losing to the Warriors last season. Once again, it's not impossible, but extremely unlikely. They most likely would've gotten killed.

A contending team should be a team you could see winning a championship at the end of the year and not be shocked by it. Going into the playoffs, the Clippers weren't even expected to get past the 1st round. You would've gotten laughed at if you mentioned anything about a championship.

I don't think it's 10% at all...I was being generous in my opinion with 20%.

You seem incapable of understanding what it means to have a chance vs being the favorite.

Not sure why.

All I see when the Clippers played in the playoffs in 14 and 15 was a team that was on equal footing with the best teams in the league outside of mentally melting down when it matters most.

[DMAVS41]

Get out of here guy, 04 Pistons has a legit argument for greatest defensive team ever, Clippers are NOWHERE near their level. Mavs had Dirk, this one is more legit because people were saying Dirk would never win but that was more due to his prior personal failings than an indictment of the team.

Once they steamrolled the champion Lakers people stood up and took notice, and no point have the Clippers ever been anywhere near that impressive in any playoff run. Clippers are a joke.

Yet they were bigger underdogs going into the finals than the clippers would have been playing the Warriors.

I'm not knocking the 04 Pistons...I'm saying that just because "people would have laughed" about them winning it...doesn't make it true.

This is just so god damn stupid....we just watched them beat the Spurs and the year before were every bit as good as a right Thunder team. Teams capable of doing that don't have "no chance" to get hot and make a run.

[ArbitraryWater]

9 times outta 10 the Clippers are losing to the Warriors last season. Once again, it's not impossible, but extremely unlikely. They most likely would've gotten killed.

A contending team should be a team you could see winning a championship at the end of the year and not be shocked by it. Going into the playoffs, the Clippers weren't even expected to get past the 1st round. You would've gotten laughed at if you mentioned anything about a championship.

:oldlol:


Thats because the played the Spurs, co-favorites for the West crown among the Clippers, those 2 teams were expected in the WCF, then a few Spurs fans got pissed over their final regular season loss to the Pels, and having to play the Clips.. so many STILL expected a great series, even with SAS as slight favorites.

Then they beat the Spurs... in smooth fashion too (lost with a decent bit of bad luck in game 5).

And were major favorites against Houston.... nearly sweep them trough 4 games with TWO of those WITHOUT Paul... everybody waits for one hell of an anticipated WCF.... even the Warriors THIS YEAR were heard saying they waited on Los Angeles, looking forward to that series just like the fans...

so no, this is just untrue on your part, or falsely painted.

[Young X]

Can someone explain to me what made the 2015 Clippers contenders? Because I don't get it. :lol

I would've been completely shocked had they actually won the championship.

[DMAVS41]

Can someone explain to me what made the 2015 Clippers contenders? Because I don't get it. :lol

I would've been completely shocked had they actually won the championship.

Having two of the 10 best players in the game is part of it.

Having the best offense is part of it.

Having the 2nd best SRS is part of it.

You say "contenders" like it has to mean only Warriors, Spurs, and Cavs. We all agree with you that the Clippers weren't as good as them going in. Mainly because of their bench and because their defense was likely not going to be good enough.

I would have been shocked as well...but not shocked in a way like I looked at them and said it's virtually impossible for them to get hot and make a run.

But then they beat the Spurs....were clearly way better than the Rockets...and the Cavs had their injuries.

Things can change...

It's also very odd that such a huge fan of Paul puts such strict limits on what his team can accomplish with him leading the way.

[mehyaM24]

Can someone explain to me what made the 2015 Clippers contenders? Because I don't get it. :lol

I would've been completely shocked had they actually won the championship.

aside from the fact they won 1 and almost 2 opening road games against houston, without chris paul?

[Young X]

:oldlol:


Thats because the played the Spurs, co-favorites for the West crown among the Clippers, those 2 teams were expected in the WCF, then a few Spurs fans got pissed over their final regular season loss to the Pels, and having to play the Clips.. so many STILL expected a great series, even with SAS as slight favorites.

Then they beat the Spurs... in smooth fashion too (lost with a decent bit of bad luck in game 5).

And were major favorites against Houston.... nearly sweep them trough 4 games with TWO of those WITHOUT Paul... everybody waits for one hell of an anticipated WCF.... even the Warriors THIS YEAR were heard saying they waited on Los Angeles, looking forward to that series just like the fans...

so no, this is just untrue on your part, or falsely painted.Nothing I said was untrue. The Clippers weren't expected to beat the Spurs. Every single expert predicted the Spurs to win the series (I personally predicted the Clippers to win because I thought they matched up well, which they did).

I didn't hear anybody associate the Clippers with winning the championship going into the playoffs. Their ceiling was the WCF. They were the 5th/6th seed for most of the regular season and completely went under the radar. It wasn't until after they beat the Spurs where people even thought of them like that.

[Heavincent]

East has one real contender and then a bunch of teams that have zero chance at a title.

[ArbitraryWater]

Nothing I said was untrue. The Clippers weren't expected to beat the Spurs. Every single expert predicted the Spurs to win the series (I personally predicted the Clippers to win because I thought they matched up well, which they did).

I didn't hear anybody associate the Clippers with winning the championship going into the playoffs. Their ceiling was the WCF. They were the 5th/6th seed for most of the regular season and completely went under the radar. It wasn't until after they beat the Spurs where people even thought of them like that.

Since when do you blatantly make up stuff??

https://i.gyazo.com/ad3290438930a361446c04a7d2dbeba7.png

And they were the 2nd to 3rd seed all year long, not 5-6.........

[DMAVS41]

Since when do you blatantly make up stuff??

https://i.gyazo.com/ad3290438930a361446c04a7d2dbeba7.png

And they were the 2nd to 3rd seed all year long, not 5-6.........

Yea...this illuminates his problem.

He sees a Clippers team with home court advantage in a tough series they are a very slight underdog in as a prime example of:

"nobody thought the Clippers could win"

Which is false as you pointed out, but even if it were true...it wouldn't change the fact that the Clippers were good enough to win that series

Just like the Clippers would have been big dogs against the Warriors, but they would not be only 10% to win that series

That is stuff that is just stupid and apparently the bullshit is just on repeat here with Paul fans

[DMAVS41]

Nothing I said was untrue. The Clippers weren't expected to beat the Spurs. Every single expert predicted the Spurs to win the series (I personally predicted the Clippers to win because I thought they matched up well, which they did).

I didn't hear anybody associate the Clippers with winning the championship going into the playoffs. Their ceiling was the WCF. They were the 5th/6th seed for most of the regular season and completely went under the radar. It wasn't until after they beat the Spurs where people even thought of them like that.

Really?

So Paul couldn't have outplayed Curry over a series?

Griffin couldn't have gotten Draymond and Bogut into foul trouble?

JJ couldn't have hit a game winner in a swing game?

I wish I had your crystal ball...well, I don't, because I would have followed you to ruin by betting everything on the Spurs in a series you claim nobody with a brain had the Clippers winning

[Young X]

Having two of the 10 best players in the game is part of it.

Having the best offense is part of it.

Having the 2nd best SRS is part of it.

You say "contenders" like it has to mean only Warriors, Spurs, and Cavs. We all agree with you that the Clippers weren't as good as them going in. Mainly because of their bench and because their defense was likely not going to be good enough.

I would have been shocked as well...but not shocked in a way like I looked at them and said it's virtually impossible for them to get hot and make a run.

But then they beat the Spurs....were clearly way better than the Rockets...and the Cavs had their injuries.

Things can change...

It's also very odd that such a huge fan of Paul puts such strict limits on what his team can accomplish with him leading the way.They had the best offense, but how many times has an average defense (15th ranked) won a title?

They had the worst bench production in the league. How the hell were they supposed to beat the Warriors with these glaring holes as a team?

You even said yourself you would be shocked had the Clippers had won last season so what are we even arguing about? Nobody is shocked when a championship caliber team wins a title.

[DMAVS41]

They had the best offense, but how many times has an average defense (15th ranked) won a title?

They had the worst bench production in the league. How the hell were they supposed to beat the Warriors with these glaring holes as a team?

You even said yourself you would be shocked had the Clippers had won last season so what are we even arguing about? Nobody is shocked when a championship caliber team wins a title.

We are arguing because you insist on saying "no chance"...when we all know there was a chance. Nobody, for the reasons I already said, gave them as good of a chance as the Spurs, Warriors, or healthy Cavs....but then they beat the Spurs in a near coin flip series despite what you want to say....and the Cavs got injured.

So it comes down to a Warriors series they are at least 20% to win...that isn't "no chance"...that isn't "virtually impossible"

So...you thought nothing of it when the Mavs won in 11 with the 8th best offense and defense, only 1 elite player, and a SRS that was 8th in the league?

[ArbitraryWater]

They had the best offense, but how many times has an average defense (15th ranked) won a title?

They had the worst bench production in the league. How the hell were they supposed to beat the Warriors with these glaring holes as a team?

You even said yourself you would be shocked had the Clippers had won last season so what are we even arguing about? Nobody is shocked when a championship caliber team wins a title.

Probably more shocked with the combination of the Cavs' injuries, that it came to such a point where LAC now would have even been favorites above them... because all they would have to do is beat the Warriors, the 2015 Warriors, in one series... I would not have shocked to seen that happen. At all.

[Young X]

Since when do you blatantly make up stuff??

https://i.gyazo.com/ad3290438930a361446c04a7d2dbeba7.png

And they were the 2nd to 3rd seed all year long, not 5-6.........I didn't make up sh!t. I'm talking about the ESPN experts. They ALL picked the Spurs to win.

And the Clippers absolutely were the 5th and 6th seed for most of the season. The Warriors, Rockets, Grizzlies and Blazers were ahead of them and they flew under the radar because of it. It wasn't until the last few weeks where the Spurs and Clippers were top 3 seeds and then the Spurs lost the last game to the Pelicans and went from 2nd to 6th. This is 100% fact.

This isn't really that relevant but you're trying to make it seem like I'm lying when I'm not.

[DMAVS41]

I didn't make up sh!t. I'm talking about the ESPN experts. They ALL picked the Spurs to win.

And the Clippers absolutely were the 5th and 6th seed for most of the season. The Warriors, Rockets, Grizzlies and Blazers were ahead of them and they flew under the radar because of it. It wasn't until the last few weeks where the Spurs and Clippers were top 3 seeds and then the Spurs lost the last game to the Pelicans and lost went from 2nd to 6th. This is 100% fact.

This isn't really that relevant but you're trying to make it seem like I'm lying when I'm not.

No they didn't. I'll look for the original forecast page. I distinctly remember that they picked the Spurs in 6...and it was split 60/40 in favor of the Spurs.

Found what you were talking about....everyone didn't pick the Spurs...but only 3 of 19 or 20 picked the Clippers....then the forecast team was split 40/60

[ArbitraryWater]

I didn't make up sh!t. I'm talking about the ESPN experts. They ALL picked the Spurs to win.

And the Clippers absolutely were the 5th and 6th seed for most of the season. The Warriors, Rockets, Grizzlies and Blazers were ahead of them and they flew under the radar because of it. It wasn't until the last few weeks where the Spurs and Clippers were top 3 seeds and then the Spurs lost the last game to the Pelicans and went from 2nd to 6th. This is 100% fact.

This isn't really that relevant but you're trying to make it seem like I'm lying when I'm not.7

Grizz came back to their level around midseason I believe.. Blazers declined in the 2nd half, like in the previous year, saw it coming... pretty sure LAC/HOU were mostly viewed as 2nd seed 'rivals' coming down the stretch... but meh.

and DMAVS, says it there on the graphic, not sure what the difference is from original to updated forecast, but on the 'original' one they had them in 6 yeah.

[DMAVS41]

7

Grizz came back to their level around midseason I believe.. Blazers declined in the 2nd half, like in the previous year, saw it coming... pretty sure LAC/HOU were mostly viewed as 2nd seed 'rivals' coming down the stretch... but meh.

and DMAVS, says it there on the graphic, not sure what the difference is from original to updated forecast, but on the 'original' one they had them in 6 yeah.

I found what he was talking about.

Not everyone picked the Spurs, but all but 3 people did...

[Young X]

7

Grizz came back to their level around midseason I believe.. Blazers declined in the 2nd half, like in the previous year, saw it coming... pretty sure LAC/HOU were mostly viewed as 2nd seed 'rivals' coming down the stretch... but meh.

and DMAVS, says it there on the graphic, not sure what the difference is from original to updated forecast, but on the 'original' one they had them in 6 yeah.
As of April 1st, these were the rankings...

Warriors (61-13)
Grizzlies (51-24)
Rockets (51-24)
Blazers (48-26) *tiebreaker over the Clippers because of stupid division rules
Clippers (50-26)

Nobody was talking about the Clippers until they surprised everyone and beat the Spurs.


Really?

So Paul couldn't have outplayed Curry over a series?

Griffin couldn't have gotten Draymond and Bogut into foul trouble?

JJ couldn't have hit a game winner in a swing game?

I wish I had your crystal ball...well, I don't, because I would have followed you to ruin by betting everything on the Spurs in a series you claim nobody with a brain had the Clippers winningI never said nobody had the Clippers winning the Spurs series. I said nobody had them winning the championship. There were a some people like myself that had the Clippers beating the Spurs but most people counted them out. I'm not lying, this is what happened at the time.

What advantages did the Clippers have against the Warriors as a team? They were outmatched in every single area. The only advantage I can think of is Blake Griffin possibly dominating them and having a big series. Besides that, they would've been completely outmatched which is why I think they had very, very little chance of winning.

[DMAVS41]

As of April 1st, these were the rankings...

Warriors (61-13)
Grizzlies (51-24)
Rockets (51-24)
Blazers (48-26) *tiebreaker over the Clippers because of stupid division rules
Clippers (50-26)

Nobody was talking about the Clippers until they surprised everyone and beat the Spurs.

I never said nobody had the Clippers winning the Spurs series. I said nobody had them winning the championship. There were a some people like myself that had the Clippers winning but most people counted them out. I'm not lying, this is what happened at the time.

What advantages did the Clippers have against the Warriors as a team? They were outmatched in every single area. The only advantage I can think of is Blake Griffin possibly dominating them and having a big series. Besides that, they would've been completely outmatched which is why I think they had very, very little chance of winning.

For starters, they had a better offense and a better point guard according to you.

But I don't know why you keep trying to convince me that the Warriors would be favorites. I agree and have literally said so 1k times to you.

It's about how big....you say very very little chance. You think it's 10%....I think it's at least double than what you think.

At minimum...imo...a healthy Clippers team would have been 20% to beat the Warriors.

That just isn't, virtually impossible or "no chance"...like you claim

You also called the Clippers "terrible" currently....you seem to just go over the top when you talk about them

And of course nobody picked the Clippers to win the title...what does that prove?????

You never answered the stuff about the Mavs....the Mavs winning in 11 was in no way less shocking than it would be for the Clippers to have won it all in 15 after the Cavs suffered their injuries.

[ArbitraryWater]

As of April 1st, these were the rankings...

Warriors (61-13)
Grizzlies (51-24)
Rockets (51-24)
Blazers (48-26) *tiebreaker over the Clippers because of stupid division rules
Clippers (50-26)

Nobody was talking about the Clippers until they surprised everyone and beat the Spurs.

so what you're saying is they were one game within the 2nd seed, and pretty much everyone had them over Grizz/Rockets..

[Young X]

For starters, they had a better offense and a better point guard according to you.

But I don't know why you keep trying to convince me that the Warriors would be favorites. I agree and have literally said so 1k times to you.

It's about how big....you say very very little chance. You think it's 10%....I think it's at least double than what you think.

At minimum...imo...a healthy Clippers team would have been 20% to beat the Warriors.

That just isn't, virtually impossible or "no chance"...like you claim

You also called the Clippers "terrible" currently....you seem to just go over the top when you talk about them

And of course nobody picked the Clippers to win the title...what does that prove?????

You never answered the stuff about the Mavs....the Mavs winning in 11 was in no way less shocking than it would be for the Clippers to have won it all in 15 after the Cavs suffered their injuries.I don't mean no chance literally. What I mean is they had a very, very small chance of beating the Warriors and winning the championship with the team they had.

Like I've said, if you told me going into the playoffs that the Clippers would end up as the 2015 champions I would've been completely surprised and I'm pretty sure most people felt the same way. They didn't have a realistic chance of winning it all. That's why they weren't contenders to me.

And to address the Mavs question. It's not the same thing. The Warriors were by far better than any other team in the west for the entire season and put up historically dominant numbers/performances not seen since the '08 Celtics and '90's Bulls.

There was no team in the 2011 west or in the league at the time that was that dominant. Did I have the Mavs winning the title going into the playoffs? No, I had them losing in the 2nd round probably but I wouldn't have been nearly as shocked if you had told me they would end up as the champs. They had somewhat of a realistic shot, though unlikely which the Clippers did not have.


so what you're saying is they were one game within the 2nd seed, and pretty much everyone had them over Grizz/Rockets..They made a run after the all star break where they won 14 of their last 15 to even get to to that point. This was right in the middle of it right when they finally were in position to take one of those spots. Prior to this, nobody even talked about them as one of the contending teams.

By the way, of those 15 games, guess the one team they lost to?

[DMAVS41]

I don't mean no chance literally. What I mean is they had a very, very small chance of beating the Warriors and winning the championship with the team they had.

Like I've said, if you told me going into the playoffs that the Clippers would end up as the 2015 champions I would've been completely surprised and I'm pretty sure most people felt the same way. They didn't have a realistic chance of winning it all. That's why they weren't contenders to me.

And to address the Mavs question. It's not the same thing. The Warriors were by far better than any other team in the west for the entire season and put up historically dominant numbers/performances not seen since the '08 Celtics and '90's Bulls.

There was no team in the 2011 west or in the league at the time that was that dominant. Did I have the Mavs winning the title going into the playoffs? No, I had them losing in the 2nd round probably but I wouldn't have been nearly as shocked if you had told me they would end up as the champs. They had somewhat of a realistic shot, though unlikely which the Clippers did not have.

They made a run after the all star break where they won 14 of their last 15 to even get to to that point. This was right in the middle of it right when they finally were in position to take one of those spots. Prior to this, nobody even talked about them as one of the contending teams.

By the way, of those 15 games, guess the one team they lost to?


Really disagree with most of the above.

If you don't mean "no chance"...don't say no chance.

While there was no team as good as the 15 Warriors in the West....the 11 Heat posed just as big a problem.

So the team with only 1 star...and a SRS of 8th....playing on the road against the Lakers and Heat....is less shocking than a 2 star team with home court in one of their two toughest potential series that has the 2nd best SRS?

Just can't agree with that....unless Paul is much worse than you claim. He's either as good as you claim or he isn't....if the Clippers beating the Warriors would be the most shocking thing ever...maybe Paul just isn't as good as you claim.

Also, whether they would win or not is something I don't know, but the 11 Heat would have been favored over the 15 Warriors in a series imo.

I really just think this is just a case of you doing everything you can to downplay the failures of Paul as much as possible.

[Young X]

Really disagree with most of the above.

If you don't mean "no chance"...don't say no chance.

While there was no team as good as the 15 Warriors in the West....the 11 Heat posed just as big a problem.

So the team with only 1 star...and a SRS of 8th....playing on the road against the Lakers and Heat....is less shocking than a 2 star team with home court in one of their two toughest potential series that has the 2nd best SRS?

Just can't agree with that....unless Paul is much worse than you claim. He's either as good as you claim or he isn't....if the Clippers beating the Warriors would be the most shocking thing ever...maybe Paul just isn't as good as you claim.

Also, whether they would win or not is something I don't know, but the 11 Heat would have been favored over the 15 Warriors in a series imo.

I really just think this is just a case of you doing everything you can to downplay the failures of Paul as much as possible.Nah, I'm not trying to downplay anything. I watch alot of Clippers games and I followed them heavily last season and I see so many holes that keep them from being a true championship caliber team in this kind of conference.

They're a one-way team with a phenomenal offensive core but are below average or terrible at everything else. That's not getting past a dominant, well balanced team like the Warriors in a series.

You can't just look at the teams individually, you also have to look at their situations and the other teams they're competing with. The Warriors were clearly a more dominant team than the 2011 Heat in their respective seasons. To me, the Mavs had a much better chance at beating the Lakers or Heat than the The Clippers had at beating the Warriors.

[DMAVS41]

Nah, I'm not trying to downplay anything. I watch alot of Clippers games and I followed them heavily last season and I see so many holes that keep them from being a true championship caliber team in this kind of conference.

They're a one-way team with a phenomenal offensive core but are below average or terrible at everything else. That's not getting past a dominant, well balanced team like the Warriors in a series.

You can't just look at the teams individually, you also have to look at their situations and the other teams they're competing with. The Warriors were clearly a more dominant team than the 2011 Heat in their respective seasons. To me, the Mavs had a much better chance at beating the Lakers or Heat than the The Clippers had at beating the Warriors.

I watch a lot of Clippers games and follow them as well. Again, you seem incapable of drawing a distinction from a chance and what is expected. And all I have seen in the playoffs the last two years is a team as good or better than any team they've played...only to lose their minds in critical moments / sequences that prevents them from winning.

Yes, the Warriors were more dominant, but they also are built in a way to destroy teams in the regular season with ease....especially average to bad teams. And the 9-8 start by the Heat artificially drops them down on some of those ratings....the team they were by the playoffs and finals was dominant...and built for the playoffs.

But you'd also have to factor in that the Clippers were the 2nd best SRS rated team in the league last year....while the Mavs were the 8th.

I was a huge proponent of the Warriors last year and defended them in the finals, but we can't ignore the finals either. The playoffs/finals are played very differently than the regular season. It doesn't make them a better team, but I'd bet my money on the 11 Heat beating the Warriors...I just don't think the Warriors would be able to play their game at all against that team.

I think I might just view Paul as capable of more than you do as a player...I really think that is our difference.

If the Warriors and Clippers played last year and Paul did 25/5/12 65% TS for the series and didn't have a melt down...I'd give them a near 50% chance of winning that series.

Obviously that isn't what is "expected", but it's certainly in the realm of a real chance imo

[Young X]

I watch a lot of Clippers games and follow them as well. Again, you seem incapable of drawing a distinction from a chance and what is expected. And all I have seen in the playoffs the last two years is a team as good or better than any team they've played...only to lose their minds in critical moments / sequences that prevents them from winning.

Yes, the Warriors were more dominant, but they also are built in a way to destroy teams in the regular season with ease....especially average to bad teams. And the 9-8 start by the Heat artificially drops them down on some of those ratings....the team they were by the playoffs and finals was dominant...and built for the playoffs.

But you'd also have to factor in that the Clippers were the 2nd best SRS rated team in the league last year....while the Mavs were the 8th.

I was a huge proponent of the Warriors last year and defended them in the finals, but we can't ignore the finals either. The playoffs/finals are played very differently than the regular season. It doesn't make them a better team, but I'd bet my money on the 11 Heat beating the Warriors...I just don't think the Warriors would be able to play their game at all against that team.

I think I might just view Paul as capable of more than you do as a player...I really think that is our difference.

If the Warriors and Clippers played last year and Paul did 25/5/12 65% TS for the series and didn't have a melt down...I'd give them a near 50% chance of winning that series.

Obviously that isn't what is "expected", but it's certainly in the realm of a real chance imoI just think there's too much of a gap between the 2 teams. I think Paul or Blake putting up those kinda numbers would be enough to at most make the series somewhat competitive but it wouldn't be enough to win 4 games.

Both of those guys put up big numbers in the last 3 games against Houston and still lost badly in all of them. How the hell would that beat a much better team in Golden State that they already matchup terribly against?

[MMM]

If we are ranking conferences by contenders, then why doesn't the East from 08-12 get more love???

In each of those seasons the east arguably had more contending teams than the West

[DMAVS41]

I just think there's too much of a gap between the 2 teams. I think Paul or Blake putting up those kinda numbers would be enough to at most make the series somewhat competitive but it wouldn't be enough to win 4 games.

Both of those guys put up big numbers in the last 3 games against Houston and still lost badly in all of them. How the hell would that beat a much better team in Golden State that they already matchup terribly against?

I don't know...how the hell did the Mavs beat Lebron/Wade/Bosh without home court in the finals?

Things happen...you make it sound like we didn't see a vulnerable Warriors team in the finals vs a first year coach with a team nowhere near as good as the Clippers.

Again, it's of course not likely....but that is why it's so important to have two great players on a team. Special things can happen.

[Young X]

^^^Special things can happen, but what are the odds of those things happening? That's what I'm looking at.

You keep bringing it back to the Mavs but how often do runs like that happen? Or the '95 Rockets? Those are improbable runs.

To sum everything up, the Clippers were really good last year, a top 5 team but they had/have too many key flaws as a team to realistically have beaten the Warriors and won a championship. They were NOT a championship caliber team and they aren't this year either of course. They're in the same tier as Memphis and Houston.

The contending teams this year are the Warriors, Spurs and Cavs. I can't see any other team winning a championship. Maybe OKC will get to this level but as of right now I don't see it.

[MMM]

I agree with Young X

If the Clippers were on that level they probably should have finished off the Rockets

[mehyaM24]

I agree with Young X

If the Clippers were on that level they probably should have finished off the Rockets

if chris paul or blake griffin play even remotely average in the 4th quarter, during their close-out game at home, they would have.

that was an epic choke - rockets were down 20 and made a furious comeback with harden on the bench. LOL

[DMAVS41]

^^^Special things can happen, but what are the odds of those things happening? That's what I'm looking at.

You keep bringing it back to the Mavs but how often do runs like that happen? Or the '95 Rockets? Those are improbable runs.

To sum everything up, the Clippers were really good last year, a top 5 team but they had/have too many key flaws as a team to realistically have beaten the Warriors and won a championship. They were NOT a championship caliber team and they aren't this year either of course. They're in the same tier as Memphis and Houston.

The contending teams this year are the Warriors, Spurs and Cavs. I can't see any other team winning a championship. Maybe OKC will get to this level but as of right now I don't see it.

It all depends on how you are defining your terms...you go back and forth between "no chance"...which you say doesn't actually mean "no chance"...now it's not a realistic chance. How do you define that...is being around 25% to win a series a realistic chance?

It's honestly hard to keep up

Of course it's not likely or expected...not sure how many times I must say this. But when you have the best offense, 2 top 10 players, the 2nd best SRS (easily in the championship range)...I just don't it's fair to say the things you do

Especially when it's unforced errors that beat them the last 2 years

And, like I always point out to you when you get upset about the Paul hate, they lost to the Rockets...a team everyone was "shocked" they lost to

Have to at least get there for that special thing to happen...

[DMAVS41]

if chris paul or blake griffin play even remotely average in the 4th quarter, during their close-out game at home, they would have.

that was an epic choke - rockets were down 20 and made a furious comeback with harden on the bench. LOL

This...

[Young X]

It all depends on how you are defining your terms...you go back and forth between "no chance"...which you say doesn't actually mean "no chance"...now it's not a realistic chance. How do you define that...is being around 25% to win a series a realistic chance?

It's honestly hard to keep up

Of course it's not likely or expected...not sure how many times I must say this. But when you have the best offense, 2 top 10 players, the 2nd best SRS (easily in the championship range)...I just don't it's fair to say the things you do

Especially when it's unforced errors that beat them the last 2 years

And, like I always point out to you when you get upset about the Paul hate, they lost to the Rockets...a team everyone was "shocked" they lost to

Have to at least get there for that special thing to happen...If the series plays out 10 times, the Clippers are losing 8 or 9 times. They're simply not good enough to win a championship. You can call it whatever you want, they don't have what it takes to be a championship team.

[DMAVS41]

If the series plays out 10 times, the Clippers are losing 8 or 9 times. They're simply not good enough to win a championship. You can call it whatever you want, they don't have what it takes to be a championship team.

I think they'd win 2 or 3 times out of 10 actually....

They don't look to have much of a chance this season, but they definitely had chances the last 2 years...

But when you collapse with unforced errors and waste 2 legit years in the playoffs...you never know how many other chances you are going to get

It might be the end of this team...and, perhaps when you say they aren't good enough...you are including Paul in that. Because maybe his absurd flopping, whining, and gaming of the rules constantly rather than playing basketball trickled down to his teammates and that is why they are probably the least likable NBA team in recent memory

I don't think you can remove Paul from this as much as you want if you really feel they were always just a hopeless mess

[Young X]

I think they'd win 2 or 3 times out of 10 actually....

They don't look to have much of a chance this season, but they definitely had chances the last 2 years...

But when you collapse with unforced errors and waste 2 legit years in the playoffs...you never know how many other chances you are going to get

It might be the end of this team...and, perhaps when you say they aren't good enough...you are including Paul in that. Because maybe his absurd flopping, whining, and gaming of the rules constantly rather than playing basketball trickled down to his teammates and that is why they are probably the least likable NBA team in recent memory

I don't think you can remove Paul from this as much as you want if you really feel they were always just a hopeless messI think they had a chance in 2014. The reason is because they still had a good backup PG in Darren Collison and Jamal Crawford was still a decent player. They actually had a good bench and their defense was better. Only thing is they would've had to go through the Thunder and Spurs without homecourt and then the Heat in the finals. It would've been tough but they they had a small chance and were contenders.

The team last season and now is not capable of winning a title under normal circumstances. I don't care how you put it or who you wanna put the blame on. They cannot win a championship as constructed.

[DMAVS41]

I think they had a chance in 2014. The reason is because they still had a good backup PG in Darren Collison and Jamal Crawford was still a decent player. They actually had a good bench and their defense was better. Only thing is they would've had to go through the Thunder and Spurs without homecourt and then the Heat in the finals. It would've been tough but they they had a small chance and were contenders.

The team last season and now is not capable of winning a title under normal circumstances. I don't care how you put it or who you wanna put the blame on. They cannot win a championship as constructed.

Again, you have to define your terms. How are you defining "under normal circumstances"?

It didn't look like anything abnormal when they were beating the Thunder or when they beat the Spurs...in fact, the abnormal things were when they melted down against the Thunder and Rockets.

So if your only point is that the team isn't as good as the Thunder, Spurs, Cavs, and Warriors from the last couple years...just say that. We will all agree...just like we all agree they weren't the favorites to win those series nor were they favorites to win it all.

However, acting like it would have just been absurd for them to beat the Warriors...like it would be just the biggest upset ever for a championship level rated team by SRS and having a proven championship coach and 2 top 10 players is what my issue is.

It just wouldn't be nearly as shocking as you are claiming...and again, the Cavs would have been underdogs against them and the Rockets were nowhere near as good as them.

Remember...they lost to the Rockets.

[razzredazzre]

The West is just underachieving calm your damn souls.

[MMM]

if chris paul or blake griffin play even remotely average in the 4th quarter, during their close-out game at home, they would have.

that was an epic choke - rockets were down 20 and made a furious comeback with harden on the bench. LOL

isn't that the point. Do championship level teams choke in those situations???

Reminds me of the 2010 Finals and how the Celtics completely choked in game 7. However, that wasn't really surprising to most Celtics fans because what did them in were same bad habits picked up in the 2nd half of that season. Remember how they were only a .500 team in the 2nd half that season, terrible on the glass, blew countless double digit leads, etc. funny how those same things cost them in a game 7. If Rondo doesn't play out of his mind in the East semis do the Celtics even make the finals???

[DMAVS41]

isn't that the point. Do championship level teams choke in those situations???

Reminds me of the 2010 Finals and how the Celtics completely choked in game 7. However, that wasn't really surprising to most Celtics fans because what did them in were same bad habits picked up in the 2nd half of that season. Remember how they were only a .500 team in the 2nd half that season, terrible on the glass, blew countless double digit leads, etc. funny how those same things cost them in a game 7. If Rondo doesn't play out of his mind in the East semis do the Celtics even make the finals???

Are you saying the 10 Celtics weren't a "championship level team"?

I agree they had real flaws and were hardly dominant, but a team that gets to a game 7 in the finals and a tie game with 6 minutes left...

You are saying that isn't a championship level team?

[MMM]

Are you saying the 10 Celtics weren't a "championship level team"?

I agree they had real flaws and were hardly dominant, but a team that gets to a game 7 in the finals and a tie game with 6 minutes left...

You are saying that isn't a championship level team?

maybe i being too hard on them being a Celtics fan but i remember everybody shitting the bed in that series but Rondo and Big baby. KG was still good defensively but provided little offense.

The difference between the Celtics being a championship level team and the clippers not is that the Celtics could rely on being there before which LAC couldn't. The 10 Magic and Cavs were probably better teams but Rondo's hot streak was able to get them through.

[Young X]

So if your only point is that the team isn't as good as the Thunder, Spurs, Cavs, and Warriors from the last couple years...just say that. We will all agree...just like we all agree they weren't the favorites to win those series nor were they favorites to win it all.

However, acting like it would have just been absurd for them to beat the Warriors...like it would be just the biggest upset ever for a championship level rated team by SRS and having a proven championship coach and 2 top 10 players is what my issue is.

It just wouldn't be nearly as shocking as you are claiming...and again, the Cavs would have been underdogs against them and the Rockets were nowhere near as good as them.

Remember...they lost to the Rockets.My point is that they're not even close to the Warriors level in any way therefore it's extremely unlikely that they would've beaten them 4 times in a series therefore they weren't good enough to win a championship in 2015.

I can't even think of an aspect of the game where they would have the advantage over the Warriors, they're inferior in every way possible damn near. It would've been a huge upset, the Warriors were a historic team, the Clippers were a pretty good team.

They didn't have what it takes to win a championship and they don't have it this season either, there's a reason why they even lost to the Rockets in the 1st place dude.

[DMAVS41]

My point is that they're not even close to the Warriors level in any way therefore it's extremely unlikely that they would've beaten them 4 times in a series therefore they weren't good enough to win a championship in 2015.

I can't even think of an aspect of the game where they would have the advantage over the Warriors, they're inferior in every way possible damn near. It would've been a huge upset, the Warriors were a historic team, the Clippers were a pretty good team.

They didn't have what it takes to win a championship and they don't have it this season either, there's a reason why they even lost to the Rockets in the 1st place dude.

They were the 2nd ranked team by SRS and had two top 10 players and happened to have one of the few guards in the league that could really make Curry work on both ends.

You say you watch the Clippers, but even this year...with a worse team...and the Warriors playing way better than they even did last year...the Clippers could have beaten them twice.

You honestly watched those Warriors vs Clippers games and thought....man...there is no way this team could possibly get hot and win a series against them?

Weren't the Clippers up like 23 points in the 2nd game?

Yes, it would have been an upset, but it would not be the type of historic upset last year that you are making it out to be.

[DMAVS41]

maybe i being too hard on them being a Celtics fan but i remember everybody shitting the bed in that series but Rondo and Big baby. KG was still good defensively but provided little offense.

The difference between the Celtics being a championship level team and the clippers not is that the Celtics could rely on being there before which LAC couldn't. The 10 Magic and Cavs were probably better teams but Rondo's hot streak was able to get them through.

sure, but it's getting kind of crazy if you guys are claiming a team that was literally 6 minutes from the title...as "not a championship caliber team"

[Akrazotile]

78-78 is pretty good considering the West has the Warriors.


West has the Spurs and Warriors, which should give them a huge advantage in the record.

But it also has Kobe, which completely offsets it :oldlol:

[ISHGoat]

West has the Spurs and Warriors, which should give them a huge advantage in the record.

But it also has Kobe, which completely offsets it :oldlol:

Does the Kobe cancel out with the Sixers?

[Young X]

They were the 2nd ranked team by SRS and had two top 10 players and happened to have one of the few guards in the league that could really make Curry work on both ends.

You say you watch the Clippers, but even this year...with a worse team...and the Warriors playing way better than they even did last year...the Clippers could have beaten them twice.

You honestly watched those Warriors vs Clippers games and thought....man...there is no way this team could possibly get hot and win a series against them?

Weren't the Clippers up like 23 points in the 2nd game?

Yes, it would have been an upset, but it would not be the type of historic upset last year that you are making it out to be.I don't really look regular season games as an good indicator of how a series could go. Look at the Nets in 2014, they went 4-0 against Miami, does that mean they had a decent chance of beating them in a series? No, and we all knew that and were proved right when they matched up in the playoffs.

I watched those Clippers/Warriors games and I knew the Clippers would lose both times. They don't have enough to keep up with them over an entire game, much less an entire series. If anything, those games just reinforced what I already knew. Look at the performances the Clippers got from Paul and Griffin in that 2nd game, they played that well and STILL lost.

A much better version of The Clippers almost lost to a much inferior version of the Warriors in 2014. Them losing to the Clips in 2015 would've been something almost no one would've expected to happen.

[DMAVS41]

I don't really look regular season games as an good indicator of how a series could go. Look at the Nets in 2014, they went 4-0 against Miami, does that mean they had a decent chance of beating them in a series? No, and we all knew that and were proved right when they matched up in the playoffs.

I watched those Clippers/Warriors games and I knew the Clippers would lose both times. They don't have enough to keep up with them over an entire game, much less an entire series. If anything, those games just reinforced what I already knew. Look at the performances the Clippers got from Paul and Griffin in that 2nd game, they played that well and STILL lost.

A much better version of The Clippers almost lost to a much inferior version of the Warriors in 2014. Them losing to the Clips in 2015 would've been something almost no one would've expected to happen.

It's a false analogy....the Clippers were one of the 5 best teams last year with two superstars and a proven championship coach. 2nd best SRS...

The Nets had the 20th best SRS...and nothing ever you'd think was good enough to beat elite teams in the playoffs.

You are reaching beyond belief on that one.

You knew the Clippers would blow a 23 point lead? Non sense....nothing of those two games so far this season implies one team has virtually no chance to beat the other in as series.

And what about the first game? Griffin wasn't great by any means...Crawford couldn't hit a shot...still took the lead into the 4th and it was a very close game.

You are using a series in which the Clippers won as evidence they couldn't beat them the very next year? What?

Jesus christ...stop talking about what people would expect....it doesn't always go down like that....and nobody is arguing that the Clippers would be favored or expected to win.

[Young X]

It's a false analogy....the Clippers were one of the 5 best teams last year with two superstars and a proven championship coach. 2nd best SRS...

The Nets had the 20th best SRS...and nothing ever you'd think was good enough to beat elite teams in the playoffs.

You are reaching beyond belief on that one.

You knew the Clippers would blow a 23 point lead? Non sense....nothing of those two games so far this season implies one team has virtually no chance to beat the other in as series.

And what about the first game? Griffin wasn't great by any means...Crawford couldn't hit a shot...still took the lead into the 4th and it was a very close game.

You are using a series in which the Clippers won as evidence they couldn't beat them the very next year? What?

Jesus christ...stop talking about what people would expect....it doesn't always go down like that....and nobody is arguing that the Clippers would be favored or expected to win.I'm not comparing them as teams just showing that regular season games aren't a great indicator for how playoff matchups should go. That probably wasn't the best example I could use though. :lol

And yes I did believe they would blow that lead. I don't have any faith in that team. I knew as soon as CP went to the bench they would lose all their momentum, it happens all the time. Just happened a couple days ago against the Spurs.

Then on top of that, they don't have the defense and rebounding needed to get stops in the 4th quarter and they don't have an answer for Curry. In both games, Curry went off in the the 4th quarter and there was nothing the Clippers could do about it.

You say there's nothing that implies one team having virtually no chance (or very little chance) against the other? Well, what about the Clippers allowing the Warriors to shoot I think 8/9 from 3 in the 4th quarter? What about Paul having by far his best game of the season and it still not being enough? What about not being able to win despite being up 23 on your home floor at one point?

I used their 2014 series to show you how well the Warriors matchup with the Clippers. If the Clippers could barely beat them in 2014, how the hell are they beating them in 2015?

[DMAVS41]

I'm not comparing them as teams just showing that regular season games aren't a great indicator for how playoff matchups should go. That probably wasn't the best example I could use though. :lol

And yes I did believe they would blow that lead. I don't have any faith in that team. I knew as soon as CP went to the bench they would lose all their momentum, it happens all the time. Just happened a couple days ago against the Spurs.

Then on top of that, they don't have the defense and rebounding needed to get stops in the 4th quarter and they don't have an answer for Curry. In both games, Curry went off in the the 4th quarter and there was nothing the Clippers could do about it.

You say there's nothing that implies one team having virtually no chance (or very little chance) against the other? Well, what about the Clippers allowing the Warriors to shoot I think 8/9 from 3 in the 4th quarter? What about Paul having by far his best game of the season and it still not being enough? What about not being able to win despite being up 23 on your home floor at one point?

I used their 2014 series to show you how well the Warriors matchup with the Clippers. If the Clippers could barely beat them in 2014, how the hell are they beating them in 2015?

When a team has the 2nd best SRS, a proven championship coach, 2 top 10 players, the best or 2nd best player to go against Curry at his position, coming off beating them the year before.

It is not a "how the hell are they going to win" situation...

Yes, the Warriors improved and the Clippers got worse. That is why the Clippers wouldn't be favored like they were in 14.

How would they win? They would get hot, hope the Warriors go in a funk like they did in the finals, and not meltdown in close games.

Likely? Nope. Favored? Nope. Craziest thing ever like you are implying? Nope.

But, like I've said, we've had this conversation before...and even talking about the Warriors is kind of silly. The Clippers didn't play the Warriors...only time they played the Warriors in the playoffs...they won.

[Young X]

When a team has the 2nd best SRS, a proven championship coach, 2 top 10 players, the best or 2nd best player to go against Curry at his position, coming off beating them the year before.

It is not a "how the hell are they going to win" situation...

Yes, the Warriors improved and the Clippers got worse. That is why the Clippers wouldn't be favored like they were in 14.

How would they win? They would get hot, hope the Warriors go in a funk like they did in the finals, and not meltdown in close games.

Likely? Nope. Favored? Nope. Craziest thing ever like you are implying? Nope.

But, like I've said, we've had this conversation before...and even talking about the Warriors is kind of silly. The Clippers didn't play the Warriors...only time they played the Warriors in the playoffs...they won.You can't just "hope the Warriors go in a funk". You have to play DEFENSE to get them in a funk.

The Clippers are not capable of doing that at all.

They don't play the defense needed to win a championship.

The only players they had that were above average on defense were their center and 5'11 point guard.

They had a total of 2 solid defenders on their team. That's part of the reason why they're NOT a team that's capable of winning a championship. i.e. not a contender.

They would've been the worst defensive team to win a title in the modern era.

Then you add their worst in the league bench production and you have a team that relies 100% on the offensive greatness of 4 players only and a bunch of negative impact players.

[DMAVS41]

You can't just "hope the Warriors go in a funk". You have to play DEFENSE to get them in a funk.

The Clippers are not capable of doing that at all.

They don't play the defense needed to win a championship.

The only players they had that were above average on defense were their center and 5'11 point guard.

They had a total of 2 solid defenders on their team. That's part of the reason why they're NOT a team that's capable of winning a championship. i.e. not a contender.

They would've been the worst defensive team to win a title in the modern era.

Then you add their worst in the league bench production and you have a team that relies 100% on the offensive greatness of 4 players only and a bunch of negative impact players.

All you continue to describe is why the Clippers wouldn't be likely to beat the Warriors...not why the Clippers "had no chance" to beat them.

Not sure how many times I must repeat that there is a difference between being favored, equal, underdog, huge dog, and no chance.

You seem incapable of grasping this.

[Young X]

All you continue to describe is why the Clippers wouldn't be likely to beat the Warriors...not why the Clippers "had no chance" to beat them.

Not sure how many times I must repeat that there is a difference between being favored, equal, underdog, huge dog, and no chance.

You seem incapable of grasping this.Well as I've already said, "no chance" is a poor choice of words. I'm not saying it's impossible but it's extremely unlikely.

They're on 2 completely different levels...

The Warriors are a historic team that put up historic numbers, are extremely well balanced and won a championship.

The Clippers are/were a pretty good, but one dimensional, flawed team that cannot win a championship as constructed.

I look at the Clippers in the same breath as the Grizzlies - a very good team that doesn't have enough to win a title. Their ceilings are hopefully the WCF.

Neither team has what it takes to be truly great and do something special. Same thing with the Rockets, the Bulls, the Raptors or whoever. These teams are/were not contenders.

[DMAVS41]

Well as I've already said, "no chance" is a poor choice of words. I'm not saying it's impossible but it's extremely unlikely.

They're on 2 totally different levels...

The Warriors are a historic team that put up historic numbers, are extremely well balanced and won a championship.

The Clippers are/were a pretty good, but one dimensional flawed team that cannot win a championship as constructed.

I look at the Clippers in the same breath as the Grizzlies - a very good team that doesn't have enough to win a title.

Neither team has what it takes to be truly great and do something special. Same thing with the Rockets, the Bulls, the Raptors or whoever. These teams are/were not contenders.


I really think you under-rate the Clippers last year and the year before. How much I can't really tell based on your words because just above you said "no chance" was a poor choice of words...but just below you say they "cannot win" a championship as they were constructed...so I hope you understand my confusion

I'm not sure about the different levels in a one off playoff series. The Clippers had the SRS rating of most champions last year and while I already talked about their shortcomings that prevent them from being on equal footing....

I see no reason in the games I've watched since 14 against the Warriors that the Warriors are on a "different level" in terms of those matchups.

In the range of huge favorite, favorite, slight favorite, equal, slight dog, underdog, huge underdog, no chance

I think the Clippers, last year, would fall in the range between underdog and huge dog....roughly a 20% chance, give or take a little, to beat the Warriors in a series

Certainly not in any range that would "shock the basketball world" like you are claiming

[Young X]

I really think you under-rate the Clippers last year and the year before. How much I can't really tell based on your words because just above you said "no chance" was a poor choice of words...but just below you say they "cannot win" a championship as they were constructed...so I hope you understand my confusion

I'm not sure about the different levels in a one off playoff series. The Clippers had the SRS rating of most champions last year and while I already talked about their shortcomings that prevent them from being on equal footing....

I see no reason in the games I've watched since 14 against the Warriors that the Warriors are on a "different level" in terms of those matchups.

In the range of huge favorite, favorite, slight favorite, equal, slight dog, underdog, huge underdog, no chance

I think the Clippers, last year, would fall in the range between underdog and huge dog....roughly a 20% chance, give or take a little, to beat the Warriors in a series

Certainly not in any range that would "shock the basketball world" like you are claimingOf those champions that had SRS's similar to the Clippers, did any of them play in a conference or league that had a team with a 10+ SRS?

You realize that no team in the modern era that good has ever lost a playoff series right?

I think the Clippers would've/should've been seen as huge underdogs. I think it's likely they would've gotten killed. Kinda like how the Magic fared against the Bulls in 1996.

[DMAVS41]

Of those champions that had SRS's similar to the Clippers, did any of them play in a conference or league that had a team with a 10+ SRS?

You realize that no team in the modern era that good has ever lost a playoff series right?

I think the Clippers would've/should've been seen as huge underdogs. I think it's likely they would've gotten killed. Kinda like how the Magic fared against the Bulls in 1996.

There have been similar gaps with teams winning.

You realize I'm not arguing that the Clippers would have won...right? Like...how many times must this be said?

Also, I feel like you are ignoring the vulnerability we saw in both the Memphis series and finals....and ignoring the matchups here. Paul or Westbrook would be the two guys in the league you'd want going against Curry in a series.

[Young X]

There have been similar gaps with teams winning.

You realize I'm not arguing that the Clippers would have won...right? Like...how many times must this be said?

Also, I feel like you are ignoring the vulnerability we saw in both the Memphis series and finals.That vulnerability was seen because Memphis and Cleveland had defenses that could slow them down.

The Clippers don't have that, they're a SOFT defensive team.

They match up worse against the Warriors compared to a team like Memphis because of this.

There's no Tony Allen on the Clippers who can slow down a Klay Thompson. Their best perimeter defender by far and one of their only 2 solid defenders was 5'11.

[DMAVS41]

That vulnerability was seen because Memphis and Cleveland had defenses that could slow them down.

The Clippers don't have that, they're a SOFT defensive team.

They match up worse against the Warriors compared to a team like Memphis because of this.

There's no Tony Allen on the Clippers who can slow down a Klay Thompson. Their best perimeter defender by far one of their only 2 solid defenders was 5'11 and has a huge offensive load to carry.

We've already talked about the defense....that is what holds them back from being as good as the Warriors. If they had a top 5 defense...they wouldn't be dogs in the series.

I actually don't think the Cavs played great defense...they just slowed the game down. The Cavs certainly weren't a Memphis level defense by any means, but we don't have to go down that road.

Again, all you are doing is explaining the reasons why the Clippers would likely not win. Which, as I've repeatedly said...I agree with most of them.

You've come off the "no chance" stuff....so I guess that is good enough.