[2017] The Finals

[KingsFanGER]

Smallball works well when the SF you move to center is 6'11" and has a bajillion foot wingspan. Just because the Warriors can do it well doesn't mean the rest of the league can, seeing as how that team features two MVPs, six all-stars (Durant/Curry/Klay/Dray/Iguodala/West), a couple all-NBA defenders, and has set the record for most wins in a season.

Even when the Cavs are "playing small", Lebron is 6'9" and built like a freaking tank. Were he not also the most athletic human being on the planet, he'd probably still make it in the league as a center so it's really hard to see this as a whole "SMALLBALL IS WORKING!!!" thing more than a "THE BEST PLAYERS IN THE UNIVERSE ARE REALLY REALLY FREAKING GOOD!" thing.

screw Kevin Durant

screw the Warriors

screw our FO for mismanaging the Demarcus Cousins trade. Not just for us, but for the League. The only way to beat the warriors is to attack the fact they do not have a legitimate inside presence. Demarcus Cousins as the most dominant and versatile big in the league will be central to anyone's ability to dethrone the warriors. If i am Danny Ainge and the Celtics i am going hard at Cousins. If i need to trade IT to do it, im doing it. The addition of Gordan Hayward in FA will help but a dominant paint presence is the only way that we can avoid watching this drivel for the next 4 years + and the Celtics are solid enough for me to get it done.

I think these posts are somewhat interesting, because they touch a neverending discussion on this board, that led to me becoming a member a few years back.

So far DMC or any other big hasn't proven to be able to beat the "small ball" Warriors. The Warriors "death" lineup of Green, Barnes, Iggy, Klay and Curry was specialised in running bigger, slower lineups off the floor. Even when attacked inside Green was usually able to hold enough ground to allow his team to outscore the opponent. Durant elevated this playstyle to a new dimension.
To beat the Warriors you have to be able to stop their offensive onslaught. Are teams built around true bigs able to do that?
You have to keep the TO's low and you have to score extremely efficient to force them into the halfcourt. Even if you succeed your big will be attacked in the pick&roll on every possession and more often than not you trade 2 for 3. The ref's are another adversity usually calling contact on the perimeter more often than in the paint and keeping a very close eye on the bigs that set screens. Not only will your big be at a disadvantage, because he is forced to play through contact, but he will most likely be in more danger to get i foul trouble than the opposing perimeter players.

I'm curious, if the Warriors will be dethroned by a team, that is playing big. I have my doubts though.

Teams that gave the pre Durant Warriors fits, were usually long teams like the Bucks or teams with excellent perimeter defenders like the Celtics - well and of course the Cavs.
I agree that the key to beat the Warriors is to attack the inside the paint. But that doesn't necessarily mean, you have to play a true big. From my point of view it's more likely, that a team with a guy like Lebron or Giannis will find a way to beat them, if they are able to force them into the halfcourt.

Long story short.....small ball works.....

 

[pdxKingsFan]

What good does Cousins (theoretically) being able to dominate the Warriors do if you can't even make the playoffs?
(anyone who knows my post history knows I loved Cousins and defended him to death but this is water under the bridge now so ...)

This small ball is clearly the game the NBA wants right now. Same way that NFL jacked the rules to make it more pass heavy and less run dominant in the mid 00's, that hockey has tweaked things to get more goals, that MLB just blatantly ignored steroids because "hey homers!"

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

There is no comparison to KD joining the Kings vs joining the Warriors. The Warriors were already basically the best team when KD joined them. It would be like Larry Bird joining the showtime Lakers after they beat them in the finals...

Come on, now, let's be fair to history. It'd be more accurate to say that it'd be like Isiah Thomas joining the 1987-88 Celtics. Or maybe Michael Jordan joining the 1990-91 Pistons.

 

[jpsls]

AT the end of the day, history will only remember KD winning a championship. People hated Lebron when he formed the big 3 in Miami, but the narrative softened up after he won.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

You say this cuz it's not your team. If this happened to the kings and we won a title, there would be a statue of KD in front of the golden1 center.

Believe it or not, not every sports fan has a protagonist-centered morality about the way they consume sports. Some fans actually have the integrity to admit that something is bad for the sport, even if it benefits "their" team.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

AT the end of the day, history will only remember KD winning a championship. People hated Lebron when he formed the big 3 in Miami, but the narrative softened up after he won.

The hell do you want the rest of us to do about that? We don't have any control over the "narrative."

 

[jpsls]

The hell do you want the rest of us to do about that? We don't have any control over the "narrative."

My point is that all this talk about lacking integrity for joining the "enemy" and winning a cheap championship will dissipate in a few years.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

That depends on whom you happen to be 'listening' to.

 

[kingjatt]

What good does Cousins (theoretically) being able to dominate the Warriors do if you can't even make the playoffs?
(anyone who knows my post history knows I loved Cousins and defended him to death but this is water under the bridge now so ...)

This small ball is clearly the game the NBA wants right now. Same way that NFL jacked the rules to make it more pass heavy and less run dominant in the mid 00's, that hockey has tweaked things to get more goals, that MLB just blatantly ignored steroids because "hey homers!"

Its what the rules cater too, post up basketball is dead, its all a face up game now, heck cousins himself had most of his success facing up. Posting up allows defenses to swarm from all angles and you cant put the ball down anymore. That and the likes of Draymond Iggy etc can basically maul and two hand shove the big because they are smaller makes big men less and less relevant.

Sure you need 2 solid bigs for the regular season or maybe to match up for a series but superstar true bigs are becoming obsolete in the playoffs. Its all about speed, 3s and layups and catches the eyes of the casual fan.

Pretty much if you want to win in this league you need 2 way versatile wing players who can run and shoot lights out. Short PG's or Tall lumbering big men are liabilities now.

 

[steelevt]

Lets say it's 2002 and we just got cheated out of a championship by the referees handing the series over on a platter to the Lakers. During the summer, halfway through our mini Kings dynasty, Chris Webber holds a press conference and says he is going to leave Sacramento and take his talents to Los Angeles to team up with Shaq and Kobe. Would you be mad?

Now lets say the whole thing is reversed and we are the ones winning championships and beating the Lakers. During the summer, Kobe up and says he is taking his talents to Sacramento. I'd be less mad than I would be at Webber but I still wouldn't respect Kobe as a player because he gave up on his team to join the enemy because he knew he couldn't beat them. Or at least he knew it was going to be tough to beat them and he just wanted getting a ring to be a sure thing.

There's a reason why Isiah Thomas, Joe Dumars, Charles Barkley, John Stockton, Allen Iverson etc didn't just jump over and start playing with their most heated rivals. They knew it would have tilted the balance of power in their favor by a ton but they didn't do it because they had integrity. You beat your enemies. You don't just join them to achieve what is considered a cheap championship in the eyes of most people.

Basically this was a really long post saying you would be happy that the kings won another championship. Maybe you won't respect the player coming to us but in the end you are a kings fan and the kings winning another ring makes you happy but like 85% happy?

 

[steelevt]

Believe it or not, not every sports fan has a protagonist-centered morality about the way they consume sports. Some fans actually have the integrity to admit that something is bad for the sport, even if it benefits "their" team.

Are you one of those? Or would you be happy in the scenario where the kings win a title with a ring chaser?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I'd like to think that I am one of those, even though I still wouldn't necessarily call myself a Kings Fan right now. I certainly want to believe that I have the integrity to stand behind my convictions, but I've never had the occasion to find out, and I generally dislike playing the hypothetical game.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I will not tell a lie. Who the ring chaser is would highly influence my decision.

 

[New Era]

Smallball works well when the SF you move to center is 6'11" and has a bajillion foot wingspan. Just because the Warriors can do it well doesn't mean the rest of the league can, seeing as how that team features two MVPs, six all-stars (Durant/Curry/Klay/Dray/Iguodala/West), a couple all-NBA defenders, and has set the record for most wins in a season.

Even when the Cavs are "playing small", Lebron is 6'9" and built like a freaking tank. Were he not also the most athletic human being on the planet, he'd probably still make it in the league as a center so it's really hard to see this as a whole "SMALLBALL IS WORKING!!!" thing more than a "THE BEST PLAYERS IN THE UNIVERSE ARE REALLY REALLY FREAKING GOOD!" thing.

The didn't have Durant 2 years ago when they won the Finals and they didn't have him last year when they lost in 7 games.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

They still had the two best shooters in the world, and a guy who can guard five positions, which you pretty much need for small ball to work. About how many teams do you reckon have the luxury to being able to roll that out?

 

[New Era]

They still had the two best shooters in the world, and a guy who can guard five positions, which you pretty much need for small ball to work. About how many teams do you reckon have the luxury to being able to roll that out?

The bottom line is that Brick used to advocate that the bigman/post game was a key ingredient in order to go deep in the playoffs. Obviously, it was years ago, but it's pretty evident that it's no longer necessary.

Can you name 3 teams that currently are among the top teams in the league that have dominant big men?

 

[ESP47]

Basically this was a really long post saying you would be happy that the kings won another championship. Maybe you won't respect the player coming to us but in the end you are a kings fan and the kings winning another ring makes you happy but like 85% happy?

I didn't say I'd be happy or even elude to it at all in that "really long" post.

 

[steelevt]

I didn't say I'd be happy or even elude to it at all in that "really long" post.

So yes or no. If the kings win a championship with a ring chaser or however you want to put it, would you be happy?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Can you name 3 teams that currently are among the top teams in the league that have dominant big men?

No, I can't name any. The difference between you and me is that I think that that is more an indictment of management and coaching than it is of the big men.

 

[New Era]

No, I can't name any. The difference between you and me is that I think that that is more an indictment of management and coaching than it is of the big men.

I hear ya. I think the thing is now is that 3 point shooting has become so important. For example, Steph Curry for his career will score, on average 1.014 points for every 2 point FG he attempts versus 1.314 points for every 3 point FG he attempts. Obviously, he's one of the world's best shooters, but he also shoots a very high 2 point FG %. When you look at a guys who don't shoot as high of a 2 point FG % but are good at 3's then the numbers are skewed even more.

I think this is the heart of the new "small ball" trend that is going on.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

But this isn't 'new', though; the three-point shot wasn't invented in 2014. It took Steve Kerr thirty-five years to finish what Don Nelson started, and he still might not have done it, if Mike D'Antoni hadn't solved the DaVinci Code... and even then, it still took another decade, and that specific personnel, before it finally worked. I expect that it's going to take more than a couple of years for the coaching to catch up to the math but, when it eventually does, dominant big men will be just as valuable as they always were. It's just that the value of 'dominant' will likely be re-calibrated by then.

 

[ESP47]

So yes or no. If the kings win a championship with a ring chaser or however you want to put it, would you be happy?

No because we would have already won a championship without him.

 

[ESP47]

I hear ya. I think the thing is now is that 3 point shooting has become so important. For example, Steph Curry for his career will score, on average 1.014 points for every 2 point FG he attempts versus 1.314 points for every 3 point FG he attempts. Obviously, he's one of the world's best shooters, but he also shoots a very high 2 point FG %. When you look at a guys who don't shoot as high of a 2 point FG % but are good at 3's then the numbers are skewed even more.

I think this is the heart of the new "small ball" trend that is going on.

I think they'll have to move the 3 point line further out at some point if the league becomes too 3 point happy. It'll start to get boring after a while. 3 pointers used to be a really exciting shot but these days it's just "meh" because anyone can do it. Used to be 1 or 2 guys on the court could shoot them but these days you have to have 4 or 5 on the court at a time or else you're losing. Hopefully the NBA evens it out a bit so taking a 3 is sort of gambling like it used to be.

 

[steelevt]

No because we would have already won a championship without him.

Fair enough. I'm in the boat of winning championships is the point of rooting for the team. The goal is to watch them win. Anything short of blatantly cheating to win that championship I'm ok with. If the refs blow a call in our favor. If we get a ring chaser. If we get 5 all stars starting and a couple on the bench and run through the league. I don't care as long as the kings are winning those rings. If you are one of those win my way or how you see it as " the right way" more power to you. There is no right way to be a fan and we are both kings fans. If I came across as a jerk I didn't mean to, I just wanted a straight answer which I got. The fact that you wouldn't be happy in this scenario where we won the ring confirms your reasoning why you don't like what KD did and I respect that. I'm just on the other side where more ring > less and I can look pass how it gets done as long as it's not blatant cheating. Hopefully we see at least one in our lifetime.

 

[LPKingsFan]

Here's a hypothetical that hits home: say Karl Malone decides to join the Kings instead of the Lakers in 2003. Is that ring chasing? Maybe, but I'd argue it would have been less objectionable than joining the Lakers, who had just won three years in a row. He could have been the final piece to put the Kings over the top, filling in with Webber hurt. That would have been a nice legacy. Winning with the Lakers would have meant less (luckily, Detroit took care of business).

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

It would be much less objectionable, but still ring chasing. I have long held the opinion that the only time ring chasing is acceptable is when your original team trades you first.

 

[steelevt]

It would be much less objectionable, but still ring chasing. I have long held the opinion that the only time ring chasing is acceptable is when your original team trades you first.

Or maybe also if your original team doesn't re-sign you?

 

[mac]

screw Kevin Durant

screw the Warriors

screw our FO for mismanaging the Demarcus Cousins trade. Not just for us, but for the League. The only way to beat the warriors is to attack the fact they do not have a legitimate inside presence. Demarcus Cousins as the most dominant and versatile big in the league will be central to anyone's ability to dethrone the warriors. If i am Danny Ainge and the Celtics i am going hard at Cousins. If i need to trade IT to do it, im doing it. The addition of Gordan Hayward in FA will help but a dominant paint presence is the only way that we can avoid watching this drivel for the next 4 years + and the Celtics are solid enough for me to get it done.

The way they are calling the game you are simply not going to win with a big as your best player. The Warriors would gladly trade 3 for 2 every trip down while your star big runs baseline to baseline for 45 minutes

 

[ESP47]

Fair enough. I'm in the boat of winning championships is the point of rooting for the team. The goal is to watch them win. Anything short of blatantly cheating to win that championship I'm ok with. If the refs blow a call in our favor. If we get a ring chaser. If we get 5 all stars starting and a couple on the bench and run through the league. I don't care as long as the kings are winning those rings. If you are one of those win my way or how you see it as " the right way" more power to you. There is no right way to be a fan and we are both kings fans. If I came across as a jerk I didn't mean to, I just wanted a straight answer which I got. The fact that you wouldn't be happy in this scenario where we won the ring confirms your reasoning why you don't like what KD did and I respect that. I'm just on the other side where more ring > less and I can look pass how it gets done as long as it's not blatant cheating. Hopefully we see at least one in our lifetime.

Right on, we all look at it differently. You could even call my a hypocrite because I'll call out Durant and Lebron for chasing rings with questionable integrity but then I'll root for a guy on our team like Barnes who obviously has different kinds of integrity problems. I'm with you though, the entire point is to see your team win a championship. It's just the Kings have been the underdog for so long that it would be sweet to see them win it as the underdog. I thought they did it the right way during their hey day. The NBA definitely owes us one.

 

[Tetsujin]

But this isn't 'new', though; the three-point shot wasn't invented in 2014. It took Steve Kerr thirty-five years to finish what Don Nelson started, and he still might not have done it, if Mike D'Antoni hadn't solved the DaVinci Code... and even then, it still took another decade, and that specific personnel, before it finally worked. I expect that it's going to take more than a couple of years for the coaching to catch up to the math but, when it eventually does, dominant big men will be just as valuable as they always were. It's just that the value of 'dominant' will likely be re-calibrated by then.

Yeah. It's not like teams are running around the NBA having a fire sale on big men because "it's a small ball league now". Hell, all the "good young teams" have up-and-coming young big men that they have designated as the centerpieces of their franchises (Minny -KAT, Philly -Embiid/Simmons, Denver- Jokic, heck even the Bucks may fit in this category what with Giannis being a 7' destroyer of worlds and all). The particular era from which most of the current Warriors roster comes from was rather devoid of good big men (the Brow, Boogie being a couple of notable exceptions) but deep in wings and point guards, leading to a whole hell of a lot of really good perimeter dudes hitting their primes right at the same time with no big men to get in the way of playing three or four of them at the same time. Give the league another half decade or so and the pendulum may swing right back in the other direction given the huge amount of young big men who will be hitting their primes right around then (and another good big man draft next season).

Unless everyone's of the opinion that young big men are now going to be "less good" because of small ball. If anything, smallball has forced big men to become even better and even more unstoppable. Ten years ago, having your 6'11, 270-lb post monster take threes would have been unthinkable. Now Boogie is shooting three pointers at the same rate that Bobby Jackson did in 2002.