PDA

View Full Version : Loss of Rudy = the loss of Blake?



JasonJohnHorn
04-30-2017, 10:57 PM
I've been hearing a number of fans suggesting that using the lose of Blake as an excuse doesn't cut it because the Jazz were without Rudy.

I understand the comparison, but I don't think the loss of Gobert has the same overall impact as Blake.

Blake is the Clippers leading scorer. Paul may run the offense, but Blake is their number one option, and his scoring and passing are crucial to the team's offense. Without it, the Clippers, whose success is built more on offense than defense, are simply not as good. In addition, Blake is their second leading rebounder.

First in points and second in rebounds and assists? That is a HUGE loss for a team. Especially over the last 5 games of a series (or 4.5 games).


The loss of Gobert was huge as well, but he's only the third leading scorer, and that 'scoring' is closer to what DAJ does than what Blake does. He's not creating or setting up offense, he's getting shots when other guys are setting things up. He is EXTREMELY efficient at it, yes, and deserve most of the credit for what he does on the offensive end, but in no way does he impact the Jazz offense like Blake does for the Clippers. They've got Hood and Johnson who can pick up Gobert offensive loss when he's out, but the Clippers have nobody who can do what Blake does.

The loss of Gobert's defense is huge, yes, and he certainly impacts that end of the court more than Blake does, but the JAzz also have a couple of rebounding studs that can fill in, and good rebounding wings like Hayward and Johnson who can help out with that.

When the Clippers lose Blake, they lose their key piece of rebounding help. They don't have anybody who can pick up the slack. Without him, it's just DAJ and a 6-foot PG working the glass hard.


Moreover, the Jazz had Gobert to close out the series, where as the Clippers only had Blake the first two games (lost him part-way through the third). Making mid-game adjustments, versus knowing ahead and planning for the loss of a player is significantly different.


The Jazz earned this win, and guys like Hayward and Hill played great ball and deserve all the credit for this series, because both teams lost key players.

But the loss of Blake was a huge hit to the Clippers, and there is no reason to fault guys like Paul or DAJ for losing this series with such a huge set back. All credit to the Jazz for a great series and a well-deserved win, but there is no need to start finger pointing at guys on the Clippers roster (though a finger or two aimed at Doc is fine with me).


Thoughts? Are the losses of Gobert and Blake the same? Or apples and oranges?

TheMightyHumph
04-30-2017, 11:37 PM
I've been hearing a number of fans suggesting that using the lose of Blake as an excuse doesn't cut it because the Jazz were without Rudy.

I understand the comparison, but I don't think the loss of Gobert has the same overall impact as Blake.

Blake is the Clippers leading scorer. Paul may run the offense, but Blake is their number one option, and his scoring and passing are crucial to the team's offense. Without it, the Clippers, whose success is built more on offense than defense, are simply not as good. In addition, Blake is their second leading rebounder.

First in points and second in rebounds and assists? That is a HUGE loss for a team. Especially over the last 5 games of a series (or 4.5 games).


The loss of Gobert was huge as well, but he's only the third leading scorer, and that 'scoring' is closer to what DAJ does than what Blake does. He's not creating or setting up offense, he's getting shots when other guys are setting things up. He is EXTREMELY efficient at it, yes, and deserve most of the credit for what he does on the offensive end, but in no way does he impact the Jazz offense like Blake does for the Clippers. They've got Hood and Johnson who can pick up Gobert offensive loss when he's out, but the Clippers have nobody who can do what Blake does.

The loss of Gobert's defense is huge, yes, and he certainly impacts that end of the court more than Blake does, but the JAzz also have a couple of rebounding studs that can fill in, and good rebounding wings like Hayward and Johnson who can help out with that.

When the Clippers lose Blake, they lose their key piece of rebounding help. They don't have anybody who can pick up the slack. Without him, it's just DAJ and a 6-foot PG working the glass hard.


Moreover, the Jazz had Gobert to close out the series, where as the Clippers only had Blake the first two games (lost him part-way through the third). Making mid-game adjustments, versus knowing ahead and planning for the loss of a player is significantly different.


The Jazz earned this win, and guys like Hayward and Hill played great ball and deserve all the credit for this series, because both teams lost key players.

But the loss of Blake was a huge hit to the Clippers, and there is no reason to fault guys like Paul or DAJ for losing this series with such a huge set back. All credit to the Jazz for a great series and a well-deserved win, but there is no need to start finger pointing at guys on the Clippers roster (though a finger or two aimed at Doc is fine with me).


Thoughts? Are the losses of Gobert and Blake the same? Or apples and oranges?

All we can do is make assumptions.

tredigs
04-30-2017, 11:41 PM
Does Rudy posting 1 point with 4 boards before fouling out in 13 minutes in a decisive game 7 negate some of this post? Blake has never had a worse game in his life.

Edit: Apologies because I realize you're on Blake's side here, I'm speaking to those negating this take.

dhopisthename
05-01-2017, 12:20 AM
yeah its pretty much even. Gobert is going to finish in the top 2 in the defensive player of the year award. While Favors is a decent backup, he is a power forward and got abused by deandre on both sides of the court. Gobert is also a much better pick setter and better at rolling to the rim then anyone on the bench

tredigs
05-01-2017, 12:37 AM
Does Rudy posting 1 point with 4 boards before fouling out in 13 minutes in a decisive game 7 negate some of this post? Blake has never had a worse game in his life.

To further this, if Blake had a game like this in a game 7 it would be the end of his career as a player who was taken seriously. We don't take Gobert seriously, so he gets a pass.

dhopisthename
05-01-2017, 12:40 AM
To further this, if Blake had a game like this in a game 7 it would be the end of his career as a player who was taken seriously. We don't take Gobert seriously, so he gets a pass.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201612070LAC.html

I think going 5-20 with 7 turnovers is certainly debatably worse

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201604050LAC.html

1/5 4 points in 16:48 with 4 turnovers.

get off this Rudy thing. Just about every one of his fouls were pretty iffy considering this was a game 7 against one of the most physical centers in the league in Deandre Jordan and most importantly the Jazz still won.

tredigs
05-01-2017, 12:43 AM
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201612070LAC.html

I think going 5-20 with 7 turnovers is certainly debatably worse

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201604050LAC.html

1/5 4 points in 16:48 with 4 turnovers.

get off this Rudy thing. Just about every one of his fouls were pretty iffy considering this was a game 7 against one of the most physical centers in the league in Deandre Jordan and most importantly the Jazz still won.
You just posted two random regular season games big guy. This was a decisive game 7. And he failed to a level that was beyond comprehension. Forget him fouling out in a laughable amount of time. They were lucky he fouled out.

tredigs
05-01-2017, 12:47 AM
To be clear, I am no Blake supporter. His career has been a massive fail based on projection, but Rudy has a TON to prove before he can enter Blake's overall peak level impact.

dhopisthename
05-01-2017, 01:39 AM
You just posted two random regular season games big guy. This was a decisive game 7. And he failed to a level that was beyond comprehension. Forget him fouling out in a laughable amount of time. They were lucky he fouled out.

how on earth are they lucky he fouled out? Gobert was by far the best Jazz player this season, but you can only throw shade on Rudy because you want Draymond to win DPOY. You completely ignore his 6th best RPM, 8th best Vorp, and based on what I have seen will be on the first or 2nd all nba team all because the refs called six touch fouls on him. what about the fact that Draymond couldn't control his emotions and kicked Lebron in the balls and got suspended game 5 of the finals last year. A game that has far more meaning then this game will ever have, and because of this he probably cost his team a championship. You think he deserves DPOY? I can't disagree considering I trust Zach Lowe's judgement over both of ours and he has Draymond winning the DPOY.

valade16
05-01-2017, 01:41 AM
To be clear, I am no Blake supporter. His career has been a massive fail based on projection, but Rudy has a TON to prove before he can enter Blake's overall peak level impact.

Gobert this year posted a higher WS/48, BPM and VORP than Blake ever has. I think you could argue his defensive impact surpasses Blake's impact on offense.

No need to tear Gobert down to boost Dray up. Draymond should win DPOY this year, even if Gobert is as deserving simply to make up for not winning it 2 years ago over Kawhi like he should have.

Chronz
05-01-2017, 01:58 AM
Even if I could be fooled into thinking Gobert has a Blake level impact, look at the depth the 2 teams have to sustain the loss of such a player ffs. We're a 2 star team and I say that because Im combining our Big 3 together and then we have a bunch of flawed specialists or matchup dependent rotational guys.

FOXHOUND
05-01-2017, 01:59 AM
You may be able to make an argument as to who is better between Gobert and Blake. One thing that is fairly obvious is that Gobert is the Jazz's best player while the consensus is that Paul is the best Clipper. I don't see how they can be viewed evenly, especially when Hayward was also held to just 9 minutes in game 4 with a stomach virus.

Clippers don't get the injury excuse this year.

FOXHOUND
05-01-2017, 02:01 AM
Even if I could be fooled into thinking Gobert has a Blake level impact, look at the depth the 2 teams have to sustain the loss of such a player ffs. We're a 2 star team and I say that because Im combining our Big 3 together and then we have a bunch of flawed specialists or matchup dependent rotational guys.

But isn't that the price of having three max contract/All-NBA players? You can't have it all. Well, unless you're GS or Cleveland. lol

zn23
05-01-2017, 03:22 AM
The Jazz have a deeper team, as evidenced by how badly their bench outplayed the Clippers bench throughout the series. The Clippers lose Blake Griffin and CP3 is left with no one to help make plays. DeAndre just catches lobs. Redick is a spot up shooter, who was completely taken out of the series, Felton and Rivers both suck. Jamal Crawford is on a very clear decline.

It's not just as simple both teams lost one of their top guys. Which brings me back to how terrible Doc was in building this team.

KnicksorBust
05-01-2017, 08:03 AM
The Jazz have a deeper team, as evidenced by how badly their bench outplayed the Clippers bench throughout the series. The Clippers lose Blake Griffin and CP3 is left with no one to help make plays. DeAndre just catches lobs. Redick is a spot up shooter, who was completely taken out of the series, Felton and Rivers both suck. Jamal Crawford is on a very clear decline.

It's not just as simple both teams lost one of their top guys. Which brings me back to how terrible Doc was in building this team.

Good post. The Clippers rely on Blake more than the Jazz rely on Gobert. Plus Blake is a better overall play than Gobert. Combine those two things and it's clear the Clippers are hurt more than the Jazz.

ewing
05-01-2017, 08:23 AM
Gobert this year posted a higher WS/48, BPM and VORP than Blake ever has. I think you could argue his defensive impact surpasses Blake's impact on offense.

No need to tear Gobert down to boost Dray up. Draymond should win DPOY this year, even if Gobert is as deserving simply to make up for not winning it 2 years ago over Kawhi like he should have.

exactly. everything is about the Warriors with this guy

tp13baby
05-01-2017, 08:44 AM
Good post. The Clippers rely on Blake more than the Jazz rely on Gobert. Plus Blake is a better overall play than Gobert. Combine those two things and it's clear the Clippers are hurt more than the Jazz.

You are a big market fan. Look more into it Gobert had a better season than Blake ever has.


Gobert this year posted a higher WS/48, BPM and VORP than Blake ever has. I think you could argue his defensive impact surpasses Blake's impact on offense.

No need to tear Gobert down to boost Dray up. Draymond should win DPOY this year, even if Gobert is as deserving simply to make up for not winning it 2 years ago over Kawhi like he should have.

This is exactly on point. I would take the best rim protector in the league for a guy like has been overrated his career and shows last year when LA played great without him.


Even if I could be fooled into thinking Gobert has a Blake level impact, look at the depth the 2 teams have to sustain the loss of such a player ffs. We're a 2 star team and I say that because Im combining our Big 3 together and then we have a bunch of flawed specialists or matchup dependent rotational guys.

Depth might be the only argument you have cause you don't have to be fooled at all if you look at stats and overall impact Gobert has.



Bottom line if advanced stats are even involved, Gobert wins MIP easily. DPOY I would put him first too. Sleep on him but he was the best center in the league compared to all centers when you compile all stats. Y'all sleeping on Gobert, Blake hasn't sniffed a season like Gobert had this year.

valade16
05-01-2017, 11:45 AM
Good post. The Clippers rely on Blake more than the Jazz rely on Gobert. Plus Blake is a better overall play than Gobert. Combine those two things and it's clear the Clippers are hurt more than the Jazz.

Even when including Defense?

mrblisterdundee
05-01-2017, 12:51 PM
The Clippers have shown to play about as well without Blake as with him. I would say the loss of Gobert, the best rim protector in the league, is more important.

tredigs
05-01-2017, 02:27 PM
exactly. everything is about the Warriors with this guy

Stay trolling - it's a way of life for you. Nothing I said had anything to do with Green or the Warriors. I have no clue why Valade brought up his name or why you piggy backed on that nonsense.

Blake in '13/'14 was a top player in the NBA leading one of the top teams in the NBA. Finished 3rd in MVP voting and simply carried the Clippers when CP3 went down (Clippers went 14-6 with Blake averaging 28/9/4). Gobert has the luxury of being a bit role player offensively - and he's very good in that role. But being the engine of an offense is a much more daunting task than that of a paint protector who can't switch onto guards and who offensively is tasked with screen setting and catching lobs. His range extends to 4 feet from the basket and it's not as if he's Shaq down there backing guys down and dunking on their face. He's extremely limited. Blake was a legitimate superstar and focal point of their offense at the height of his powers in LA. Consistent injuries just cut that short.

valade16
05-01-2017, 03:14 PM
Stay trolling - it's a way of life for you. Nothing I said had anything to do with Green or the Warriors. I have no clue why Valade brought up his name or why you piggy backed on that nonsense.

Blake in '13/'14 was a top player in the NBA leading one of the top teams in the NBA. Finished 3rd in MVP voting and simply carried the Clippers when CP3 went down (Clippers went 14-6 with Blake averaging 28/9/4). Gobert has the luxury of being a bit role player offensively - and he's very good in that role. But being the engine of an offense is a much more daunting task than that of a paint protector who can't switch onto guards and who offensively is tasked with screen setting and catching lobs. His range extends to 4 feet from the basket and it's not as if he's Shaq down there backing guys down and dunking on their face. He's extremely limited. Blake was a legitimate superstar and focal point of their offense at the height of his powers in LA. Consistent injuries just cut that short.

First Bolded: Good for 13/14 Blake. That was 4 years ago. A lot has changed since then.

Second Bolded: Being a rim protector is consistently shown to be one of the most valuable skills in terms of impact, so for you to suddenly dismiss it is puzzling. I also don't think Blake is the engine that makes LAC's offense run. At the absolute most it's Co-authored by CP3 and I'd probably give him 55/45 credit for it.

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/cp3-clippers-continue-play-blake-griffin/story?id=46956604

The Clippers went 3-7 in the 10 games they played with neither of their top two players, and went 5-6 when Griffin played and Paul did not; they also lost a game when both Griffin and All-Star center DeAndre Jordan rested due to a back-to-back. But in the 10 games they played with Paul and Jordan but not Griffin, they went 8-2 with a slightly better point differential adjusted for opponent quality and location than in games when both Paul and Griffin played.

This isn't new. The Clippers have consistently stayed afloat during Griffin's injuries, going 30-15 without him during an extended absence in 2015-16 and 9-6 in 2014-15. They tend to adjust, with Paul looking to create more of his offense rather than serving primarily as a distributor, while Jordan takes advantage of the improved spacing to dominate the paint.


Your critique reeks of trying to justify Green > Gobert for DPOY, and Ewing and I weren't the only people to comment on it. Maybe that's not what you were going for, but that's how it appeared, and a lot of your questionable detractions of Gobert seem to support that notion.

tredigs
05-01-2017, 03:37 PM
First Bolded: Good for 13/14 Blake. That was 4 years ago. A lot has changed since then.

Second Bolded: Being a rim protector is consistently shown to be one of the most valuable skills in terms of impact, so for you to suddenly dismiss it is puzzling. I also don't think Blake is the engine that makes LAC's offense run. At the absolute most it's Co-authored by CP3 and I'd probably give him 55/45 credit for it.

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/cp3-clippers-continue-play-blake-griffin/story?id=46956604

The Clippers went 3-7 in the 10 games they played with neither of their top two players, and went 5-6 when Griffin played and Paul did not; they also lost a game when both Griffin and All-Star center DeAndre Jordan rested due to a back-to-back. But in the 10 games they played with Paul and Jordan but not Griffin, they went 8-2 with a slightly better point differential adjusted for opponent quality and location than in games when both Paul and Griffin played.

This isn't new. The Clippers have consistently stayed afloat during Griffin's injuries, going 30-15 without him during an extended absence in 2015-16 and 9-6 in 2014-15. They tend to adjust, with Paul looking to create more of his offense rather than serving primarily as a distributor, while Jordan takes advantage of the improved spacing to dominate the paint.


Your critique reeks of trying to justify Green > Gobert for DPOY, and Ewing and I weren't the only people to comment on it. Maybe that's not what you were going for, but that's how it appeared, and a lot of your questionable detractions of Gobert seem to support that notion.

I have directly argued Draymond over Gobert, I have no issue having that argument. That has nothing to do with this current argument, and no rational person would ever make that conclusion based on my posts. Beyond that, my point was focused on Blake's "peak level impact", hence me bringing up his peak level impact. At this juncture it is certainly more CP3 focused again. But back to Gobert, the Jazz winning a decisive game 7 on the road in spite of him is no small matter IF we're trying to bring him into the conversation of being a superstar level player (which it seems we are).

Rim protection is indeed a highly valuable skill, and he's great at it, but there's no excuses for going AWOL in game 7's, particularly when your team wins in spite of it. Harden still gets grief for his AWOL performance against the Clippers (being benched during their epic comeback when the game/series was all but over). Then again having one of the worst closeout games from a superstar in history against the Warriors (2 for 11 from the field and the most turnovers ever in a playoff game). These are legitimate knocks on his legacy, and if we are going to start throwing Gobert into the conversation with the All-NBA guys (which he should be), then you need to acknowledge the monumental failures as well. It's not "hating" and it has jack **** to do with the Warriors, it's about continuity and holding stars accountable. But again, he's a Jazz player with no real offensive game, so we don't take him seriously enough to actually hold him accountable.

valade16
05-01-2017, 04:00 PM
I have directly argued Draymond over Gobert, I have no issue having that argument. That has nothing to do with this current argument, and no rational person would ever make that conclusion based on my posts. Beyond that, my point was focused on Blake's "peak level impact", hence me bringing up his peak level impact. At this juncture it is certainly more CP3 focused again. But back to Gobert, the Jazz winning a decisive game 7 on the road in spite of him is no small matter IF we're trying to bring him into the conversation of being a superstar level player (which it seems we are).

Rim protection is indeed a highly valuable skill, and he's great at it, but there's no excuses for going AWOL in game 7's, particularly when your team wins in spite of it. Harden still gets grief for his AWOL performance against the Clippers (being benched during their epic comeback when the game/series was all but over). Then again having one of the worst closeout games from a superstar in history against the Warriors (2 for 11 from the field and the most turnovers ever in a playoff game). These are legitimate knocks on his legacy, and if we are going to start throwing Gobert into the conversation with the All-NBA guys (which he should be), then you need to acknowledge the monumental failures as well. It's not "hating" and it has jack **** to do with the Warriors, it's about continuity and holding stars accountable. But again, he's a Jazz player with no real offensive game, so we don't take him seriously enough to actually hold him accountable.

First Bolded: Nor I, I think Draymond > Gobert and Dray should win DPOY this year.

Second Bolded: What does that have to do with the OP's question? We're talking about the excuse that CP3 didn't have Griffin this year but that is negated by the Jazz not having Gobert. Bringing up peak Griffin is about as irrelevant as saying CP3 choked because he had Paul Pierce and peak Pierce was great.

Third Bolded: The Clippers beat the Jazz with Gobert and no Blake Griffin in a closeout game 6, does that negate Griffin's impact on the Clippers because they were able to win?

I agree, when we start talking historically this Game 7 that the Jazz won without Gobert should be a factor in his legacy. But it's literally 1 game in a 1st Rd series, unless this becomes the defining moment of his career, it shouldn't hold a massive impact.

If Curry can recover from his Finals performance last year and him getting abused defensively by Kyrie at the end of game 7, I think Gobert should be able to recover from a single game in a 1st round series at 24 years old...

tredigs
05-01-2017, 04:12 PM
First Bolded: Nor I, I think Draymond > Gobert and Dray should win DPOY this year.

Second Bolded: What does that have to do with the OP's question? We're talking about the excuse that CP3 didn't have Griffin this year but that is negated by the Jazz not having Gobert. Bringing up peak Griffin is about as irrelevant as saying CP3 choked because he had Paul Pierce and peak Pierce was great.

Third Bolded: The Clippers beat the Jazz with Gobert and no Blake Griffin in a closeout game 6, does that negate Griffin's impact on the Clippers because they were able to win?

I agree, when we start talking historically this Game 7 that the Jazz won without Gobert should be a factor in his legacy. But it's literally 1 game in a 1st Rd series, unless this becomes the defining moment of his career, it shouldn't hold a massive impact.

If Curry can recover from his Finals performance last year and him getting abused defensively by Kyrie at the end of game 7, I think Gobert should be able to recover from a single game in a 1st round series at 24 years old...

I was just going on a slight tangent and comparing Blake's peak to Gobert in regards to how demolished Blake would be on a forum like this (and nation wide on the news) if he put up a game 7 stinker like that. And likely still would be. I understand it's different than what the OP was talking about (we tend to go on tangents in threads...).

It's Gobert's first playoff series. So he's 0 for 1. We're either treating him like a star or we're not. My take is that we're not.

Firefistus
05-01-2017, 06:22 PM
I get a kick out of this. You guys are comparing Blake Griffin to Rudy Gobert.

They will NEVER be looked at the same way for a couple reasons.

1. Blake Griffin was drafted 1st. A SOLID 1st. Everyone knew he was going to be a great player.
Gobert was drafted 27th and traded to Utah for 2 second rounders. How's that first pick doing for ya?

2. Griffin is in L.A. So everyone is going to watch him all the time, he's like Notre Dame, they may suck, but they still get the most national TV games in the nation whether they suck or not. (Not saying Notre Dame sucks right now or is good, just an example)

3. The 2 have completely different games. Griffin's D isn't good, but his offense is quite good. Of course you're going to think Griffin is better if you value offense over defense.

Bottom line, Griffin was handed all-star before he even played a game. Gobert had to earn everything he's done. And now you guys are arguing if he's better or not than Blake. In my book that's a win for anyone that's a Jazz fan. I'll just keep letting you guys argue over it while I watch Gobert play out his contract for the next 5 years with Utah.

tredigs
05-01-2017, 06:35 PM
I get a kick out of this. You guys are comparing Blake Griffin to Rudy Gobert.

They will NEVER be looked at the same way for a couple reasons.

1. Blake Griffin was drafted 1st. A SOLID 1st. Everyone knew he was going to be a great player.
Gobert was drafted 27th and traded to Utah for 2 second rounders. How's that first pick doing for ya?

2. Griffin is in L.A. So everyone is going to watch him all the time, he's like Notre Dame, they may suck, but they still get the most national TV games in the nation whether they suck or not. (Not saying Notre Dame sucks right now or is good, just an example)

3. The 2 have completely different games. Griffin's D isn't good, but his offense is quite good. Of course you're going to think Griffin is better if you value offense over defense.

Bottom line, Griffin was handed all-star before he even played a game. Gobert had to earn everything he's done. And now you guys are arguing if he's better or not than Blake. In my book that's a win for anyone that's a Jazz fan. I'll just keep letting you guys argue over it while I watch Gobert play out his contract for the next 5 years with Utah.

And I'll continue to acknowledge much of this as fact. At least the bit about nobody expecting anything out of Gobert, and him playing for the mini market Jazz, so he has a free pass to **** the bed. Where you are wrong is that Blake had nothing handed to him other than massive expectations due to his incredible sophomore year at Oklahoma. A victim of his own success in that regard. As for thinking you're some savant for understanding defensive impact, where was that transcendent defensive impact in this series, particularly in Game 7? He certainly didn't look hobbled, just bad. You want this guy to be seen on a stars level when he delivers (now the expectation), then don't cry at the walls when someone critques his failures accordingly. That's my underlying point here.

I am a fan of Gobert by the way. He does not deserve your guys pity and deflection when he ***** the bed, particularly if it's the biggest game of his life.

valade16
05-01-2017, 06:41 PM
I am a fan of Gobert by the way. He does not deserve your guys pity and deflection when he ***** the bed, particularly if it's the biggest game of his life.

Nor your derision and scorn.

tredigs
05-01-2017, 06:50 PM
Nor your derision and scorn.
Hahahah awww, that's cute. It's called accountability Valade, and stars DESERVE to be held accountable. Anyway, I have said my piece. Go back to handling poor little Rudy Gobert with the baby gloves gents.

valade16
05-01-2017, 07:19 PM
Hahahah awww, that's cute. It's called accountability Valade, and stars DESERVE to be held accountable. Anyway, I have said my piece. Go back to handling poor little Rudy Gobert with the baby gloves gents.

If only you were as hard on your Dubs as you were on Gobert. I really hope I'm there the day you realize how much of a homer you are lol.

Cracka2HI!
05-01-2017, 08:02 PM
Weird thread. I don't think many Clippers fans are that upset or making excuses at all. Most fans I know expected this or to get blown out 4 times by GSW in Round 2. Honestly the Warriors getting Durant was so deflating for Clipper fans after the last 2 playoff disasters. I don't know even 1 Clipper fan that thought this was a Championship caliber team this year. I've gotten some hate for that but imagine if you're teams biggest rival was the best team in the league then picked up the 2nd or 3rd best player. It doesn't get you fired up for NBA basketball. I also don't think Gobert helped Utah very much. Favors made a much bigger impact imo.

tredigs
05-01-2017, 08:18 PM
If only you were as hard on your Dubs as you were on Gobert. I really hope I'm there the day you realize how much of a homer you are lol.

Calling me a homer, when I am in no way speaking about the Warriors other than to respond to you speaking about the Warriors. You are a ****ing clown and have no leg to stand on in this debate. Hence trolling.

Firefistus
05-01-2017, 08:29 PM
Calling me a homer, when I am in no way speaking about the Warriors other than to respond to you speaking about the Warriors. You are a ****ing clown and have no leg to stand on in this debate. Hence trolling.

I thought you said your peace? In any event, be as hard on Rudy as you want, bottom line is he's harder on himself than anyone in the forums ever will be. Also remember, Rudy is only 24 and has only been in the league for 3 years. He's going to continue to grow and honestly, I think he still has upside. He just has that hunger of improving every year, and his growth on offense was immense this year.

And yes, I will give him a by considering how the refs called his fouls last game. I'm not upset that they called fouls on him like they did. I'm upset that they weren't consistent and calling the same type of fouls on Jordan, and that's unusual for Utah. Gobert rarely has over 2 fouls a game.

valade16
05-01-2017, 10:37 PM
Calling me a homer, when I am in no way speaking about the Warriors other than to respond to you speaking about the Warriors. You are a ****ing clown and have no leg to stand on in this debate. Hence trolling.

You think you're smarter than you are and we correctly saw what you were doing. Honestly your constant need to validate the Warriors by belittling everyone who could be a threat to them is pathetic. If the Warriors were as good as you claim you wouldn't feel the need to crap on anyone who is compared to them.

tredigs
05-01-2017, 11:55 PM
You think you're smarter than you are and we correctly saw what you were doing. Honestly your constant need to validate the Warriors by belittling everyone who could be a threat to them is pathetic. If the Warriors were as good as you claim you wouldn't feel the need to crap on anyone who is compared to them.

No, just smarter than you. I was only thinking about him and Blake and how BG would be treated in this same situation. But believe whatever you like, as you seem to be all about fairy-tale land ideas this week.

valade16
05-02-2017, 12:08 AM
No, just smarter than you. I was only thinking about him and Blake and how BG would be treated in this same situation. But believe whatever you like, as you seem to be all about fairy-tale land ideas this week.

You're the one living in a fairy tale if you think people would be crushing Blake Griffin in his first playoff series. Nobody was giving the Clippers or Griffin crap for losing to the Spurs in 2012. The only reason the Clippers get so much grief is the cumulative failures of 5 years in a row. And as if to prove the idiocy of your point, even now people subscribe more blame and ire towards CP3 than they do to Griffin for the Clippers struggles.

In short, the idea that people would be crushing Griffin or any other player for a failure in their first ever player series is absurdly stupid. If Griffin had this game now, after 5 consecutive playoff appearances and being in his prime yeah he'd get more grief than Gobert.

Your argument does to context what your posts in this thread have done to cognitive thought: which is to say butcher it. Fairy-tale land? You've a long way to go before you can get that close to anything resembling reality as far off as your opinion is, and judging by your logic in this case, you're taking the short bus to get there.