PDA

View Full Version : At full strength how do Cavs and Warriors match up?



rocketfuel
05-31-2015, 02:26 AM
Let's assume Kevin Love had been healthy, Kyrie and Lebron are 100%..... Klay Thompson 100%... How do these teams matchup? And who takes the best of 7. I know Tristan Thompson is playing out of his mind...but Kevin Love's 3 point accuracy certainly would have added a different dimension.

More-Than-Most
05-31-2015, 02:47 AM
Warriors are still better by a good bit

Supreme LA
05-31-2015, 05:23 AM
Warriors are still better by a good bit

How so??

I believe the only thing that makes the Warriors better is the fact that Curry and Klay are such tremendous threats from the perimeter. Take Curry away from that Warriors team and replace him with any other star and I don't see them being quite as good. Curry's ability to spread the floor for his teammates and have defenses constantly focused on him is what allows his other teammates to flourish. I mean seriously, we're talking about a kid you literally have to pick up from midcourt because he's a threat even a few feet from that range.

Talent wise, both teams are pretty evenly matched through their entire rosters. The only difference is the playing style of each superstar for each team. If your whole team focuses in on stopping Curry, the floor would be so open for other guys to get easy buckets. Whereas if you pack the paint and stop Lebron, you're forcing his teammates to make jumpshots and isolation plays. This is exactly where Kyrie will come in to benefit and be able to break down defenses with penetration in moments that Lebron comes up short. Kyrie's ability to play one on one will be crucial and Lebron will gladly defer to him in those moments because Kyrie is a better one on one offensive player.

More-Than-Most
05-31-2015, 05:48 AM
How so??

I believe the only thing that makes the Warriors better is the fact that Curry and Klay are such tremendous threats from the perimeter. Take Curry away from that Warriors team and replace him with any other star and I don't see them being quite as good. Curry's ability to spread the floor for his teammates and have defenses constantly focused on him is what allows his other teammates to flourish. I mean seriously, we're talking about a kid you literally have to pick up from midcourt because he's a threat even a few feet from that range.

Talent wise, both teams are pretty evenly matched through their entire rosters. The only difference is the playing style of each superstar for each team. If your whole team focuses in on stopping Curry, the floor would be so open for other guys to get easy buckets. Whereas if you pack the paint and stop Lebron, you're forcing his teammates to make jumpshots and isolation plays. This is exactly where Kyrie will come in to benefit and be able to break down defenses with penetration in moments that Lebron comes up short. Kyrie's ability to play one on one will be crucial and Lebron will gladly defer to him in those moments because Kyrie is a better one on one offensive player.

You take curry out and add James/Durant and they are better because both are better than curry when healthy by a good bit.... Curry is amazing but not as good as these 2 nor is he harder to defend then these 2... That being said even fully healthy I am not sold on Kyrie or Love... Kyrie is having a fantastic year yes but he hasnt been close to that in these playoffs and love had had a ton of trouble fitting in.... That being said after those 3 they have an ok team where is the warriors are deeper and all around better... I think the cavs have the best player in the world of course but the warriors are the better all around team... Everyone was so sold on the heat and how great they were but I thought the spurs and several other teams were always better... having a big 3 is pretty flawed because the rest of the roster is pretty thin... Right now Shumpert and Smith are playing with the James effect where is they are playing well above who they are but I doubt it will last.... Who else on this team is there to actually worry about? Like others have stated I think the bulls and hawks are legit but the heat are pretty lucky they are in the finals with the injuries they have... Healthy I think the warriors/spurs/Grizzlies are better than the cavs because of how deep their teams are.

Munkeysuit
05-31-2015, 06:22 AM
Live by the 3, die by the 3...

Goose17
05-31-2015, 07:30 AM
Live by the 3, die by the 3...

I'm not sure which team you're talking about.

In the post season the Warriors are leading all teams in 3pa, averaging 30.3 3pt attempts per game and making 38%

After them the leaders are the Cavs. Who are averaging 29.2 attempts per game and shooting 35%

In the regular season the Warriors were 4th in 3 point attempts. Cavs were second.


Either way Charles Barkley must be feeling sick. All that trash he was talking about "jump shooting teams" and the post season leaders in 3pa #1 and #2 are in the final.

Goose17
05-31-2015, 07:35 AM
Am I really the only person that thinks the Cavs are better off without Love?

TT is a much better defender than Love (that's not difficult though). Along with Mozgov, TT makes up for any rebounding they've lost. The only thing they're losing out on is spacing. And you can get a stretch 4 off the bench to provide that for a fraction of what they're paying Love.

Love just isnt any good for the cavs. Unless he's your second option offensively and you're using him to put up 25-30 a night, you're just wasting his talent imo.

He's so overrated at this point and the Cavs simply don't need him. Think of the bench they could have if they used that money to add some depth.

xxplayerxx23
05-31-2015, 08:00 AM
GS has the much better bench, GS has a defender for love GS has the better C the better backcourt. And guys to throw at lebron iggy Barnes green klay. Contain the role players and they win either way

Vee-Rex
05-31-2015, 08:35 AM
Am I really the only person that thinks the Cavs are better off without Love?

TT is a much better defender than Love (that's not difficult though). Along with Mozgov, TT makes up for any rebounding they've lost. The only thing they're losing out on is spacing. And you can get a stretch 4 off the bench to provide that for a fraction of what they're paying Love.

Love just isnt any good for the cavs. Unless he's your second option offensively and you're using him to put up 25-30 a night, you're just wasting his talent imo.

He's so overrated at this point and the Cavs simply don't need him. Think of the bench they could have if they used that money to add some depth.

We aren't better w/o Love. We're able to mitigate Love's loss incredibly. Love gives us better depth and more versatility. People think that just because we had Love it meant Thompson wouldn't get much PT.

That Thompson/Love/Bron frontcourt was much better than Thompson/Jones/Bron. Love and Thompson played really really well together. Talk about rebounds galore.

MonroeFAN
05-31-2015, 09:06 AM
Lol @ the explanation of why the Cavs aren't as good as the Warriors. Not sold on all-star players. Maybe soon they will earn your trust.

I heard kyrie wanted to sign in Philidelphia actually. You're straight though, right?

Goose17
05-31-2015, 09:12 AM
We aren't better w/o Love. We're able to mitigate Love's loss incredibly. Love gives us better depth and more versatility. People think that just because we had Love it meant Thompson wouldn't get much PT.

That Thompson/Love/Bron frontcourt was much better than Thompson/Jones/Bron. Love and Thompson played really really well together. Talk about rebounds galore.

I disagree whole heartedly. For what they use him for there's way cheaper options out there that can also hold their own defensively.

Honestly I think the Cavs are wasting money on the guy. They could have so much more depth. With the money they're potentially going to be paying him they could bring in 2 maybe even 3 high caliber role players off the bench. Or even a 6th man of the year type guy and a decent back up big.

likemystylez
05-31-2015, 09:32 AM
I disagree whole heartedly. For what they use him for there's way cheaper options out there that can also hold their own defensively.

Honestly I think the Cavs are wasting money on the guy. They could have so much more depth. With the money they're potentially going to be paying him they could bring in 2 maybe even 3 high caliber role players off the bench. Or even a 6th man of the year type guy and a decent back up big.

do you remember how good jj hickson looked when he was playing with lebron in Cleveland early in his career? There are a lot of similarities... I actually think hickson was a more complete player. Lets hope thompson contact doesnt turn into one like hicksons

Goose17
05-31-2015, 09:36 AM
do you remember how good jj hickson looked when he was playing with lebron in Cleveland early in his career? There are a lot of similarities... I actually think hickson was a more complete player. Lets hope thompson contact doesnt turn into one like hicksons

Thompson has always been a good rebounder. Especially on the offensive glass.

And Hickson isn't a bad player at all. Sure LeBron makes these guys better. But these guys are good players, it's a combination of LeBron making them better and them not being noticed when they're on losing teams.

Scoots
05-31-2015, 01:44 PM
Defense and team chemistry are always undervalued. Love hurts both.

slashsnake
05-31-2015, 01:50 PM
Let's assume Kevin Love had been healthy, Kyrie and Lebron are 100%..... Klay Thompson 100%... How do these teams matchup? And who takes the best of 7. I know Tristan Thompson is playing out of his mind...but Kevin Love's 3 point accuracy certainly would have added a different dimension.

Don't forget a healthy varejao. That is a big team if they are healthy

Scoots
05-31-2015, 02:00 PM
I wonder, if things had not started so bad for the Cavs if they make any of the mid-season moves they made that made such a big difference. Maybe not.

Chrollo
05-31-2015, 02:08 PM
Warriors are still slightly bit better because their pieces mesh better than the Cavs'.

RLundi
05-31-2015, 02:33 PM
Am I really the only person that thinks the Cavs are better off without Love?

TT is a much better defender than Love (that's not difficult though). Along with Mozgov, TT makes up for any rebounding they've lost. The only thing they're losing out on is spacing. And you can get a stretch 4 off the bench to provide that for a fraction of what they're paying Love.

Love just isnt any good for the cavs. Unless he's your second option offensively and you're using him to put up 25-30 a night, you're just wasting his talent imo.

He's so overrated at this point and the Cavs simply don't need him. Think of the bench they could have if they used that money to add some depth.

Love is not overrated. There is a huge difference between being underutilized or misused and overrated or disposable or negligible. Just because Love was not used properly does not suddenly make him overrated, just as it didn't make Bosh overrated when his numbers slipped drastically. Playing with other superstars, especially LeBron, tends to have those effects. It hardly negates the player's ability though.

Perhaps you could argue that the Cavs don't need him as much as they thought they may have. Again, that still doesn't render him overrated; more so, not a good fit.

rocketfuel
05-31-2015, 06:43 PM
But, Kevin Love could have been an extra weapon..... say he got hot from 3 for several games....certainly that would make an impact. Tristan played a lot even when Love was there so it's only a matter of availability of another weapon.

koreancabbage
05-31-2015, 06:54 PM
Love, Thompson, Varajao greater than or equal to Bogut, Lee, Green

koreancabbage
05-31-2015, 06:55 PM
Love, Thompson, Varajao greater than or equal to Bogut, Lee, Green

I would take Clevelands rebounders because they are just bigger. Green gives up too much size (still a good rebounder but smaller than the Cleveland front court)

likemystylez
05-31-2015, 07:11 PM
Love, Thompson, Varajao greater than or equal to Bogut, Lee, Green

I would take Clevelands rebounders because they are just bigger. Green gives up too much size (still a good rebounder but smaller than the Cleveland front court)

Warriors also have mo speights and festus ezeli as front court players

koreancabbage
05-31-2015, 07:15 PM
Warriors also have mo speights and festus ezeli as front court players

I'd still take the Warrior's big men. minus green bc Lebron plays the same role.

It would be

Speights, Lee, Ezeli, and Bogut

vs

Love, Varajao, Thompson.

I'd still with the Cavs bigs.

Only reason why Warriors win is that their backcourt is better than the Cavs backcourt, not because of what the Warriors front court can do.

goingfor28
05-31-2015, 07:29 PM
Add a healthy Love and Varejao to Cleveland and they are looking mighty good. They're still fantastic but you add those 2 to Mozgov and TT and that is a great 4 players at PF/C

likemystylez
05-31-2015, 07:37 PM
I'd still take the Warrior's big men. minus green bc Lebron plays the same role.

It would be

Speights, Lee, Ezeli, and Bogut

vs

Love, Varajao, Thompson.

I'd still with the Cavs bigs.

Only reason why Warriors win is that their backcourt is better than the Cavs backcourt, not because of what the Warriors front court can do.

well the warriors also have more players that can do more things.... which sounds kinda over simplified... but then so does evaluating back court and front court like its a bunch of one on one games out there

Hotone1401
05-31-2015, 08:24 PM
You take curry out and add James/Durant and they are better because both are better than curry when healthy by a good bit.... Curry is amazing but not as good as these 2 nor is he harder to defend then these 2... That being said even fully healthy I am not sold on Kyrie or Love... Kyrie is having a fantastic year yes but he hasnt been close to that in these playoffs and love had had a ton of trouble fitting in.... That being said after those 3 they have an ok team where is the warriors are deeper and all around better... I think the cavs have the best player in the world of course but the warriors are the better all around team... Everyone was so sold on the heat and how great they were but I thought the spurs and several other teams were always better... having a big 3 is pretty flawed because the rest of the roster is pretty thin... Right now Shumpert and Smith are playing with the James effect where is they are playing well above who they are but I doubt it will last.... Who else on this team is there to actually worry about? Like others have stated I think the bulls and hawks are legit but the heat are pretty lucky they are in the finals with the injuries they have... Healthy I think the warriors/spurs/Grizzlies are better than the cavs because of how deep their teams are.

I still don't think the Warriors are better by "a good bit" like you originally suggested. I think the teams are pretty evenly matched. Lebron has plenty of help on the boards and Curry's playing style just opens things up for everyone else. I still think Lebron's dominance will wear the W's down as the series carries on.

AIRMAR72
05-31-2015, 09:13 PM
Let's assume Kevin Love had been healthy, Kyrie and Lebron are 100%..... Klay Thompson 100%... How do these teams matchup? And who takes the best of 7. I know Tristan Thompson is playing out of his mind...but Kevin Love's 3 point accuracy certainly would have added a different dimension.the Cavs play better WITHOUT Kevin love, I'm a fan of love but christin does a better job at rebounding and defense IQ christin is solid around the paint and inside with long arms he is always in position for offensive rebound Cavs wins easily in 5 to 6games

Scoots
05-31-2015, 10:18 PM
Love, Thompson, Varajao greater than or equal to Bogut, Lee, Green

I would take Clevelands rebounders because they are just bigger. Green gives up too much size (still a good rebounder but smaller than the Cleveland front court)

Green is the top defensive rebounder left in the playoffs. He and Bogut are both All NBA defensive players. Lee, Speights, and Ezeli are not scrubs, and the other front court players Barnes and Iguodala are not exactly bad at their jobs.

The Cavs are better at 1 spot in the starters and no spots in the backups. The difference is not huge but it is pervasive.

IKnowHoops
05-31-2015, 10:24 PM
Am I really the only person that thinks the Cavs are better off without Love?

TT is a much better defender than Love (that's not difficult though). Along with Mozgov, TT makes up for any rebounding they've lost. The only thing they're losing out on is spacing. And you can get a stretch 4 off the bench to provide that for a fraction of what they're paying Love.

Love just isnt any good for the cavs. Unless he's your second option offensively and you're using him to put up 25-30 a night, you're just wasting his talent imo.

He's so overrated at this point and the Cavs simply don't need him. Think of the bench they could have if they used that money to add some depth.

They would be at there best with a healthy love coming off the bench for TT. But I agree with the point. They are a better starting 5 with TT starting than with Love starting. But the lack of depth can come to bite them right now.

IKnowHoops
05-31-2015, 10:30 PM
I disagree whole heartedly. For what they use him for there's way cheaper options out there that can also hold their own defensively.

Honestly I think the Cavs are wasting money on the guy. They could have so much more depth. With the money they're potentially going to be paying him they could bring in 2 maybe even 3 high caliber role players off the bench. Or even a 6th man of the year type guy and a decent back up big.

This is the route they should go IMO. But I wouldn't mind keeping him either. If the Cavs win it this year, they will have learned a lot about how the team is going to be successful moving forward. They will have the winning formula. Then you add Verejao and Love next year to a championship team...I think we may be looking at a Bron 3 peat.

But either way, if they trade Love for some nice young athletic pieces that are able to contribute at a Shumpert/JR/Tristan type level, then this team will be insanely deep and also ready to 3 peat.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-31-2015, 10:47 PM
If Love was playing, it'd give Love the opportunity to be the hero since Green would have to be defending Lebron.

He'd fail though.

rocketfuel
06-01-2015, 12:24 AM
Love was starting to get hot from 3 when he got injured. It's just an option that Blatt doesn't have now. Before he could have had a Mozgov/Love or Tristan/Love at all times... and if the game is close and they need a shot, Love is one of the most accurate guys on the team.

rocketfuel
06-17-2015, 03:45 PM
Would Love and Kyrie have put them over the top? It was pretty close until the last 2 games.... How would Love fare against the small ball?

sportsfanatic99
06-17-2015, 03:49 PM
It would have defintely helped Cleveland. Curry couldn't guard Irving at all and Irving got into the lane to initiate his own offense.

Love would have helped Cleveland for second chance points with Mozzy and Thompson. Heck even Varajao would have got them second chance points. There would literally wear down GSW's front court - almost no let down from the starting unit to the bench.

Love also can initiate his own offense. Would have opened the floor a little more for Lebron because Love camping at the 3 point line would have lured one of Green or Bogut further from the rim for the likes of Lebron and irving

rocketfuel
06-17-2015, 03:56 PM
Love's probably the Cavs most dependable 3 point shooter.... without Kyrie and Love, the Cavs were no match for the Warriors in a 3 point contest... The Cavs role players are terrific but I think they operate better as just role players and can't step up to be Lebron's #2, #3... Mozgov and Tristan are better off reacting to an opportunity created by Lebron or Kyrie, than being able to post up themselves. Also the Warriors have one of the better defenses so it's not like the role players can suddenly take it up a notch and get an advantage.

Sofnr
06-17-2015, 04:26 PM
It would definitely be more interesting. But i don't like the argument that an injured cavs team taking 2 means they would have won if healthy. That's just not the way it works. No doubt a healthy Cavs team would have had a better chance but i'd still have favored the Warriors. Let's not forget that the warriors went 67-15 in the West and the healthy Cavs went 53-29 in the East. The Warriors were a much better team all year. The playoffs are a different animal and the Cavs might have been a threat if Lebron has some help but a tougher challenge might have spurred the Warriors to play much better as well. I'd still say Warriors in 6 or 7 even against a healthy Cavs team.

Vinylman
06-17-2015, 04:33 PM
i would have liked to see the small ball on the cavs side

kyrie
Lebron
Love
JR
Shump

KnicksorBust
06-17-2015, 04:39 PM
I am more interested to know if people think the Cavs were missing Kyrie or Love more...

rocketfuel
06-17-2015, 09:37 PM
Well, looking at next year.... who's going to be on the team? Is JR Smith still going to be on the team? I guess maybe Love might be back and not sure how Kyrie will progres.... How would the Cavs fare next year? The Warriors will be back in the hunt. The Thunder if they reload... Spurs maybe.... in the East, it would probably just be the Cavs.

JordansBulls
06-18-2015, 12:12 AM
Cavs were better already, they should have used Marion more so he would have locked up Iggy like he did Lebron in 2011.

Tony_Starks
06-18-2015, 12:21 AM
It goes 7 games. Lebron is more efficient but still comes up small when it matters. They still lose. The end.

rJeezy
06-18-2015, 02:10 AM
If those guys were healthy then David Blatt will probably not have ditched his princeton or whatever offense that clearly does not work with LeBron skill set. They went to an ISO game in the finals in which LeBron was comfortable at. Obviously was a double edged sword because of Mozgov.

torocan
06-18-2015, 01:10 PM
It's hard to say. The Cavs offense would definitely improve but their defense would most likely take a serious hit. Love just isn't that good at defending and I really wouldn't expect Kyrie to be able to slow down Curry for 7 full games. He's just not going to throw himself around the way Delladova does.

Also, you trade off some of Lebron's value by sharing the ball more with Kyrie and Love so it's hard to say how that works out over the entire series.

I still think GSW wins, but it would be closer. I wouldn't be surprised if ended in 7 games.

rocketfuel
06-18-2015, 03:51 PM
The Cavs had a lot of trouble scoring if Lebron wasn't serving it up on a platter for them... they also desperately needed more guys to hit that 3.

Chronz
06-18-2015, 04:23 PM
Cavs were better already, they should have used Marion more so he would have locked up Iggy like he did Lebron in 2011.

You do know how long ago 2011 was and that there is no Tyson Chandler to back him here, right?

Get with reality JB, Marion got hurt in the Atlanta series, hes so old it doesn't take much for him to get injured. Expect him and Mike Miller to announce their retirement soon.

Chronz
06-18-2015, 04:29 PM
You guys are talking about 2 max guys who made the team better ALL SEASON. Just because Cleveland was forced into this gameplan doesn't mean it was the only gameplan to win with. People misunderstand the Dubs as an offensive dynamo when in reality its their defensive versatility that makes them unique. So either way, you're playing into their hands, thats the beauty of being an elite team on BOTH ends. They key is slowing their transition attack.

You can still slow the game down with Kyrie and Love, the defense suffers but you can still slow the pace. If Cleveland plays a slow place their offensive firepower shines further because they aren't as reliant on transition buckets as GS.

Someone check the numbers but Im pretty sure Cleveland rated as the superior offensive team once they acclimated to the new roster. So in reality, they would be playing THEIR game by going offensive, not the other way around.

Scoots
06-18-2015, 05:13 PM
Miller, Marion, and Jones made the Cavs extra thin down the stretch and 100% of the blame for that goes to GM LBJ.

ILLUSIONIST^248
06-18-2015, 05:14 PM
Warriors in 5

Chronz
06-18-2015, 05:39 PM
I keep forgetting about Andy V, that guy would have been HUGE for them when the Warriors went small.

ChitownSports16
06-18-2015, 05:46 PM
Imo GS would be putting up way better numbers then what they did. K.I. And Love defense would have GS playing like they were during the season. The back up of those 2 came in known as defenders making it harder for them to score.

ChitownSports16
06-18-2015, 05:48 PM
Miller, Marion, and Jones made the Cavs extra thin down the stretch and 100% of the blame for that goes to GM LBJ.

Never understood why he carried those bums with him.

nastynice
06-18-2015, 06:41 PM
This would be awesome to see next year!! I'd still take the dubs, prob in 5 or 6

Scoots
06-19-2015, 12:35 PM
People keep talking about Varejao being missed, but had he not been hurt then Mozgov probably isn't on the team and it changes even more.

If Waiters was still on the team there would have been another player willing to put up 30 shots a game :)

JasonJohnHorn
06-19-2015, 05:31 PM
Hard to say. We never saw the Cav as full strength this year. Anderson-V was out all year.

Given that the Cavs without those three were a free-throw away from going up 0-3, I'd say they could be the Warriors. If the Warriors even had one other person that was worth guard besides James, he would have been shooting over 45% instead of 38%.

Schulte212
06-19-2015, 06:06 PM
This thread is just filled with Warriors fans, right? Because the answer to this question is so incredibly obvious after watching the Finals. The Cavs took the Warriors to six games without two top-20 players. Add those players back into the lineup, and the Cavs roll.

Cavs in 4.

Scoots
06-20-2015, 01:53 AM
This thread is just filled with Warriors fans, right? Because the answer to this question is so incredibly obvious after watching the Finals. The Cavs took the Warriors to six games without two top-20 players. Add those players back into the lineup, and the Cavs roll.

Cavs in 4.

If it was obvious the ESPN analysts wouldn't have picked the Warriors in such a scenario.

nastynice
06-20-2015, 03:43 AM
Hard to say. We never saw the Cav as full strength this year. Anderson-V was out all year.

Given that the Cavs without those three were a free-throw away from going up 0-3, I'd say they could be the Warriors. If the Warriors even had one other person that was worth guard besides James, he would have been shooting over 45% instead of 38%.

how could we have possibly gone down 0-3 if we won game ONE? Are you suggesting if we lost game 1 then games 2 and 3 would have played out the exact same way? If so, that's a pretty odd approach...

Vinylman
06-20-2015, 11:45 AM
how could we have possibly gone down 0-3 if we won game ONE? Are you suggesting if we lost game 1 then games 2 and 3 would have played out the exact same way? If so, that's a pretty odd approach...

Love didn't play game one ... he is saying if both Love and Kyrie were healthy for the entire series...

nastynice
06-20-2015, 12:39 PM
lol @ thinking cleveland is better with love than TT

Schulte212
06-20-2015, 02:09 PM
If it was obvious the ESPN analysts wouldn't have picked the Warriors in such a scenario.

Haha you are citing ESPN "analysts" as if they are some sort of expert? If I were you, I wouldn't look to Skip Bayless as an authoritative source.

Cavs with Lebron, Kyrie, and Love are WAY better than the Warriors. JR and Shumpert are 4th and 5th options on that team. Mozgov, TT, and Verajao would eat the Warriors alive inside. Such a shame we didn't get to see the Cavs at full strength.

Scoots
06-20-2015, 02:26 PM
Haha you are citing ESPN "analysts" as if they are some sort of expert? If I were you, I wouldn't look to Skip Bayless as an authoritative source.

Cavs with Lebron, Kyrie, and Love are WAY better than the Warriors. JR and Shumpert are 4th and 5th options on that team. Mozgov, TT, and Verajao would eat the Warriors alive inside. Such a shame we didn't get to see the Cavs at full strength.

Actually I think you'll find that I said "If it was obvious" which could be construed as an insult for ESPN if you like :).

In reality it is not "obvious" the Cavs at full strength would be better than the Warriors or anyone. It's possible, but "obvious" is a long way from where we are. The matchups would not change one way but both ways. The Warriors play best at a faster pace and with more room and the lack of Irving and Love slowed the pace and reduced the space. To assume that Irving and Love would make a Cavs win a lock is delisional ... and pointless since it didn't happen and the Cavs didn't win.

Maybe next year we'll get a Warriors/Cavs final again and this time have everyone healthy ... but the odds are against it as both teams have several players who are often hurt in Irving, Love, Varejao, Curry, Bogut, Livingston.

nastynice
06-20-2015, 02:48 PM
Actually I think you'll find that I said "If it was obvious" which could be construed as an insult for ESPN if you like :).

In reality it is not "obvious" the Cavs at full strength would be better than the Warriors or anyone. It's possible, but "obvious" is a long way from where we are. The matchups would not change one way but both ways. The Warriors play best at a faster pace and with more room and the lack of Irving and Love slowed the pace and reduced the space. To assume that Irving and Love would make a Cavs win a lock is delisional ... and pointless since it didn't happen and the Cavs didn't win.

Maybe next year we'll get a Warriors/Cavs final again and this time have everyone healthy ... but the odds are against it as both teams have several players who are often hurt in Irving, Love, Varejao, Curry, Bogut, Livingston.

Its not delusional, its just not understanding basketball.

..but sometimes its funner like that ;)