Playoff Game Thread
- Thread starter ElUno20
- Start date
After he took that shot to the head he wasn't the same player, and he was brilliant for most of the game.
I love that Harden flailed and flopped on that play, like he got hit in the face.
While old man Manu is righteously getting some shine, and Leonard didn't have a great game by his standards, but I'll take this moment to express my unconditional love for all things Kawhi. He's not even 26 (!) and is already up there with Messi, Mike Tyson and Jason Kidd (can't help it, genius PGs get me every time) as my all-time favorite non-Boston athlete to watch. He'll go down as a top 5 (maybe top 3?) wing ever when he's done. Hopefully he's not too hobbled for the rest of the series.
There is something twisted about a team, who is without their MVP candidate and arguably the best young player in the game, beating a team with one of the top MVP candidates, on their home floor.
I don't buy this outcome though. This game will be close by the end.
I don't buy this outcome though. This game will be close by the end.
He has 2 shots and 5 turnovers at the half. Peyton Manning even considers that not showing up for a big game...
He most likely won't. As much as people liked to complain about his candidacy being based on a round-number stat, the tide seemed to turn heavily among voters when Russ went on that crazy run down the regular season stretch to break both triple-double records (most games and average for a season). Someone on the Internet has been tracking public votes, and it looks like Westbrook should win by a 15-30% margin.
Last edited:
Lot of folks pointing out that he took a shot to the head in the 4th quarter of game 5, and may be playing concussed.
It would explain a lot if that turned out to be true. He looked like he was in a daze all game. Didn't take a single shot until deep into the 2nd, which is crazy.
I buy this more than the Harden is "soft" takes or some NBA beat writer throwing out this shit:
Agreed but people have to have their takez. As I said earlier, this game speaks volumes about the whole MVP argument and how silly it actually is on some levels. The Spurs just won two games with a limited and then no Kawhi including a close out on the road. On the other side, Harden didn't play like an average rotation player tonight, let alone one of the front-runners for the MVP.
Not that he warrants or deserves pity but I will feel badly for Harden if he wins it because all people will point to is this game and series.
Harden has been so good for us, it's stupid to blame him for a bad game. We were in no man's land until we got him, now we can almost book a conference semis in for the next few years. He needs help, an athletic front court player with some range would be perfect.
Rockets are basically going to have to run it back with the same team next year due to their cap situation and lack of draft capital. I just don't see how Harden gets any help.
I actually think they can come back with roughly the same cast and make it further. Capela has more upside imho, as do Dekker and Harrell. Of all the teams, aside from the Bucks, who have been bounced thus far, this team has the best chance to come back and go further. The only guy they lose is Nene and they can bring them back if the so choose or try to add a younger big given that they have little bit of room under the cap.
Houston fans shouldn't feel like this was their only bite at the apple.
They're stuck in Clipperland. Not good enough and limited ability to get better. Next year, Warriors will obviously be better and likely Spurs as well. Clippers, Jazz, and maybe even Portland or OKC could be better. I think this Rockets team is in that 3-7 seed land of being good but not a real threat to win anything. Gordon somehow played 75 games for them this year. I see that as pretty unlikely to repeat next year.
Insanely, no home team has won a game in which they've faced elimination this entire playoffs. They're now 0-10.
Round 1
POR G4 – loss
IND G4 – loss
MEM G6 – loss
CHI G6 – loss
ATL G6 – loss
MIL G6 – loss
LAC G7 – loss
Round 2
UTA G4 – loss
TOR G4 – loss
HOU G6 – loss
(OKC is the only team to be eliminated on the road).
Wizards on the clock...
JInx indeed!
Actually, as much as it pains me to note it ... it's now *eleven* straight losses in home elimination games going back to last year's Finals Game 7.
Actually, as much as it pains me to note it ... it's now *eleven* straight losses in home elimination games going back to last year's Finals Game 7.
Yeah, I don't feel it's our only bite. I mean, in a sense, we don't have a real bite because the Warriors will be unbeatable for the next 5 years. That sucks.
If they were a normal 1 seed, I would be confident of beating them at least once in the next few years.
We have some young guys and we can make some room to get an upgrade. Maybe Harden gets a bit better and pushes us up to a 58-62 win team.
There's still upside, I agree.
While I agree the warriors are head and shoulders above the rest, anything can happen. Taking this year and adding another 5, that's 8 straight finals appearances. That's asking for a lot to go right.
They are all young enough to be dominant for the duration of their next max contracts. Durant and Curry will sign for 5 years this summer. I think injury is the only thing stopping them from doing it. No one else is young enough to outlast them, maybe the Wolves when their core mature. The other best players in the league are all stuck on teams that won't become dominant (Harden, Westbrook, CP, Davis, Lillard).
Predicting stuff five years down the road, in hoops as in life, is kind of a fool's errand. How likely did the Warriors' ascension seem in 2009 when they were were one of the joke franchises of the association, working on their 800th straight losing season, with a core of Monta Ellis, Andris Biedrins and a bunch of scrubs?
As El Uno notes, you can't assume so much remains static for so long. Heck, even putting the Ws in the Finals *this* year requires some assumptions — everyone stays healthy, Kawhi doesn't destroy Durant on both ends, Popovich doesn't come up with greatest coaching scheme of the century, etc. If we're talking five years (knocking on wood with a lot of this)...
- Kerr's still dealing with major health issues that could force him to retire sooner than later
- Curry turns 30 next season and had pretty serious issues with his ankles early in his career that (god forbid!) could always recur
- Durant is 29, and has also had a serious foot issue (and fwiw, he's not likely to sign a five year deal next Summer — from everything I've read he's more likely to take his one year "non-Bird" raise)
- Iguodala, quietly one of the straws that stirs the team's drink, is 33 and will almost certainly not be his current self sometime soon
- Draymond's only 27, but has a breakneck style of play and body type that might not age well, and a temperament that might wear thin on his teammates or management
- West is 36, Zaza is 33, and the C spot remains a big issue, barring the unlikely blossoming of Damian Jones
- Any or all of Livingston, McGee, Ian Clark et al. could get huge contract offers that the team is unwilling or unable to match
- The young guys the team is trying to develop to fill out the roster cheaply (McCaw, Looney, Damian Jones) could wash out
- The Kawhi monster is still only 26, Dejounte Murray looks like a potential star, and Buford and Popovich are magicians
- An early-mid-20s guy like Giannis, Towns, a healthy Embiid, Fultz et al. could blow up and grab control of the league at any time (see Curry, 2014)
Etc. Etc. Etc.
From a probability standpoint, if we're trying to gauge their chances of making eight straight finals, the fact that they have two in the bank does not affect their chances of making the next six (including this year's). But I'd rate the chances of making all of the next six as pretty slim.
More immediate question that I should know the answer to: when was the last time the same two teams met in the Finals for three straight years, in any of the four major sports?
Last edited:
This is true, but the Warriors have four stars, rather than three. Curry/Durant/Green/Thompson is a much better core than James/Wade/Bosh/?
The biggest issues for an extended run of dominance are 1) health, and 2) turning over the 5-8 spots in the rotation. Iggy is the first really key player who's going to age out.
The bad news for the rest of the league is that the Warriors could decline a lot and still have the best team. This year's team is the best team I've seen the 2001 Lakers and is pretty clearly a top-10 team all-time. You don't need to be that good every year to win the title.
I had to look this up. The Montreal Canadiens and Detroit Red Wings met three straight years in the Stanley Cup finals in 1954-56. Of course, that was in a six-team league. That narrowly edges out the Cleveland Browns and Detroit Lions, who met in the NFL Championship Game three straight years from 1952-54.
Things change all the time. Add a Fultz and Gordon Hayward to Boston and they will be causing havoc for years to come. If Thon Maker is the real deal and Milwaukee gets healthy, they'll be in the same boat. If Minnesota gels, if NO adds depth, if Houston adds a true 2nd star, if the Wizards get a bench, if Denver trades for a Butler/George type while keeping Jokic, Harris and Murray, if Nurkic is the real deal in Portland. The 76ers have a shitload of talent too and could look completely different in 2019 or 2020. Lots of teams have amazing talent and are 1 player away or just need some more seasoning.
The NBA is a league where one player moving changes the entire landscape. Plus pretty much every star player that has ever been traded was "locked in" somewhere for awhile. The Pelicans could make cap space for Gordon Hayward. Their pick is also top 3 protected. With a little luck, they could end up with Hayward and trading the pick for another quality player. It won't happen, but stranger things. Even NO just landing in the top 3 would have a huge impact on the league next year, especially if they kept Jrue.
So many things could happen and Paul George, Jimmy Butler and Gordon Hayward are talented enough players to change the fate of one team dramatically.
The NBA is a league where one player moving changes the entire landscape. Plus pretty much every star player that has ever been traded was "locked in" somewhere for awhile. The Pelicans could make cap space for Gordon Hayward. Their pick is also top 3 protected. With a little luck, they could end up with Hayward and trading the pick for another quality player. It won't happen, but stranger things. Even NO just landing in the top 3 would have a huge impact on the league next year, especially if they kept Jrue.
So many things could happen and Paul George, Jimmy Butler and Gordon Hayward are talented enough players to change the fate of one team dramatically.
I agree you don't have to be that good every year to win the title, but you do need to be that good to win the title every year.
Also, thanks for looking up the Finals answer
I think you need to go back further than the 2001 Lakers. I mean, yea, Shaq was an absolute beast, but Kobe was only 23, and hadn't quite turned into Kobe yet. The rest of the team was a bunch of role players (Fisher, Horry, Fox, etc.). Obviously there is more to how good teams are than just listing the top players, but this GS team is so stacked at the top, I think you need to go back to the 95/96 Bulls until you have a challenger.