I think the difference in this series is that the Warriors are so good they can win when their stars don't play well. Livingston and Barbosa were the splash brothers tonight. Also, the Warriors superior defense is another big advantage. I think Cleveland should start Delly or Shump and only let Irving play when Steph goes to the bench. I wouldn't draw too much from this first game. Like the commentators said remember what SA did to OKC in the first game, also Cleveland might have been a bit rusty from all the rest. JR Smith seems to seriously bitch out in the finals. Correct me if I'm wrong but he pulled this same disappearing act in last seasons finals. Also Curry doesn't seem to be as consistently effective in the playoffs. Just like last season he wouldn't even be MVP if you did the judging right now, it would go to Thompson who single handedly saved their asses against the Thunder in game 6. How good can Curry be if he isn't even bringing it in the playoffs/finals? Most great players raise their games at this point.
Put Paul on the Bad Boys and they don't win shit. Zeke was a prime time performer. Paul underperforms on the big stage. Blake Griffin is immensely overrated as well, but with Zeke, that Clips team would have AT LEAST went to the WCF once. Taking a player who's never been past the 2nd round over Thomas is laughable. Chris Paul is THE most overrated star in NBA history.
Ignoring Pauls played consistently in the most stacked conference in league history . Ignoring Pauls done the most with less than nearly any other player other than maybe Iverson. Greatly overstating Thomas' impact on a team multiple all stars and hall of famers playing simultaneously. Your argument is so utterly juvenile it's hard to take seriously. You just take one giant results oriented stat and completely ignore all other context.
If you want to seriously continue this conversation, find an NBA history a player with less talented teammates and that hard of opposition in his conference then we can have this stupid conversation about Paul being the most overrated player ever again. The sheer dumbassery of these types of talks are maddening. If Paul had gone to the Lakers with Kobe he wouldve probably won 3 championships by now and it somehow would've made him a better player because he had better teams? Give me a break.
X feels about Paul the way you do about Barkley. Yes, if you put Paul with Kobe he would have won rings. Likewise if you put Barkley with Jordan, Sir Charles would have won rings and you would NOT be calling him the most overrated player in history.
Paul has never made any of his teams worse on any side of the ball. He's monumentally improved garbage bin teams to playoff contenders. Barkley with the Sixers was right where Paul is, getting swept in the first round, missing the playoffs twice. Give Paul a team as good as the 92 Suns and then we'll talk. Every team Paul has played on his career has been 30 win teams without him. Without Barkley that Suns team was a mid 40s, low 50s win team.... the year before that they made the Western conference semis. Barkley missed the playoffs twice, his last year in Philadelphia they won like 35 games... and this was in his prime. Paul has missed the playoffs once time in his career when he had his knee injury which obviously doesn't count as he only got to play half the season. Also I wouldn't be so sure at all Barkley wouldve been a good fit with the Bulls. The Bulls were always the best offensive team in the league, they needed defense from their big men, and Barkley didnt provide that. Simple fact that Paul is one of the very few superstars to have the misfortune of never playing with another great player. Jordan and Griffin are very good, not great players. Kobe even on his second run had Gasol who is a Hall of famer and two other very good players in pre injury Bynum and Metta World Peace and before that he had the historically dominant Shaq. Duncan had Manu and the very good Parker(and before that Robinson and now Leonard on the latest title). The shortlist of superstars with no support in the last 25-30 years is basically Hakeem who was so transcendentally talented he won anyway(albeit with Jordan out of the league), Iverson and Paul.
Prime Barkley>>>>>> Prime Paul Much better chance at building a championship team with Sir Charles as your focal point than CPChoke. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi-oVrsJ_20 ^^^^ That game alone shits on any single game of Paul's devoid of success career. Chris Paul does a helluva job of carrying teams in the regular season, but come post-season, he's just not good enough to get a team over-the-hump as "the man". As a secondary star? He'd be great. That's why the Clips need KD.
The funny thing is I actually agree with you. He cannot be the teams primary scoring option, particularly late in games due to his size and lack of explosiveness. On the other hand, just because he's not a number 1 option on a championship team doesn't mean he's not a better player. John Stockton is also a better player than Barkley, Pippen probably too. Casuals and ignorant pseudo fans just overrated box score numbers and scoring while completely ignoring the other half of the game. Bill Russell didnt win 11 titles scoring 40 points a game. Even Moses Malone, a fairly limited offensive player by todays standards did it with defense and rebounding. Duncan did it being the greatest defender of his generation while giving up the accolades of "finals mvp" to his little guards who get the glory on the back of his dirty work. It's really simple.
Neither Stock nor Pippen was a better player than Barkley. For Christ, the way you're discussing Chuck you make it seem like he was no better than Melo. Barkley beat out Jordan in MVP voting in 1990, arguably Jordan's peak season. Despite Paul being more solid overall, Barkley's offensive talent simply had more impact on games in the post-season than Paul could ever have.
Pippen even without Jordan led a team that finished with 55 wins in the conference. That team overall was less talented than the only team Barkley ever took to the Finals. Barkley, again, actually missed the playoffs and could barely get out of the first round when he didn't have a stacked team. You just overrate the guy because of scoring numbers.
Same goes for his pathetic attempt at ring chasing with the Hakeem/Drexler/Barkley super team. I wonder why that team underperformed? Probably because Barkley's impact when he isnt the focal point of the offense is a lot more neglible. Replace Barkley with any other starter calibre pf on that team and they probably do as well.
Chris Paul is a nice player but he is not even Jason Kidd because he has never been able to make those around him better. Kidd took the Nets to the NBA finals twice, replace Kidd with Paul and phonetap doesn't think the Nets make the finals those years.
NOPE. You can't minimize what Kidd did. We are talking the New Jersey NETS here. Kidd elevated that team in ways Paul could not do.
Lebron had Love and Irving and still didn't have enough help. If the Warriors get one of the next two games this series is over. Cleveland also got blown out on the road by Toronto....which in itself was a bad sign.
Yeah, it's over. Very very much over. I originally said Dubs in 6, but now I'm going with Dubs in 5. A sweep isn't outta the question at this point, but I'll give the Cavs the benefit of the doubt and say they win one game at home, saving themselves from total embarrassment. This isn't even about Steph vs Lebron. GS is just a farrrrrrrrr better basketball TEAM than these frauds. And to top it off, Kerr is light years better as a coach than Iverson's son Lue. Lebron, much as I hate him, is a great player. But he's a great player on the decline. He's also surrounded by three huge fucking LOSERS in Kyrie, Love, and JR Stiff. Well, Kyrie not so much. Irving's a damn good player. Love and Smith are losers are do more harm than good for teams. It's a whole different dynamic than being paired with a fellow all time great in Wade, and a very good complimentary piece in Bosh.
The Cavs should have left Love in Minnesota and kept Andrew Wiggins. The Cavs would have been in the NBA finals anyway and Wiggins would have given them more than Love, even on the losing end. Embarrassment.
And to think, it was only 3 years ago that the media was calling Love the next Dirk. LMFAOOOOOO!!!!! I knew he was a fraud from day 1. Nothing impressive about putting up nice stats on that Wolves team that never sniffed the playoffs. People can call Bosh "gay" all they want, but now we see Love is the real fag. Bosh had toughness and played solid D. Love is soft as tissue paper and one of the worst defenders in league history.
love looks weaker than when he was in minnesota. like he purposely slimmed down. it has hurt him as a rebounder
I just think he's a mental midget. To be fair, I don't think he's properly utilized on the Cavs, but either way, he's definitely not the star he was supposed to be. Easy to put up nice raw stats on a shitty team, but he wasn't actually helping that Wolves team win.
Agreed. Always excuses for Chris Paul. Always. He's not the winner the media hypes him to be. He's good enough to win you games in the reg season, but always always fails when it matters.... and he's never held accountable.
I disagree he only put up stats like that because he was on a bad team. You don't put up multiple games of 20&20 like Love did in Minny without being special. I'd say it's more a case of him needing to be in the right system that maximizes his strengths or he at least needs to be utilized right. Love ain't a superstar but he's an allstar who many felt was better then Griffin. Not every player will be effective on any team they go to unless they are superstars and Love just doesn't fit in Cleveland. Somehow these finals are just plain boring. I haven't been able to sit through the entirety of either game so far. Good thing it's only going 5, if that.
I agree with this. Love is all star caliber. It's just a big difference between an all star, and being called a Dirk/Barkley hybrid. Because that's what the media hype on Love was prior to him coming to the Cavs. He was hyped as a hybrid of Dirk & Barkley. Obviously, he can't shine either one of their shoes. As for Love vs. Griffin, I'd take neither! But if forced to pick one, Blake is more talented and capable of being more impactful when he's healthy and when his head is screwed on straight.
