Tatum has played more minutes than anybody in the playoffs over the last 9 seasons. He's played 140 more minutes than anybody on the Warriors. It would explain why he looks gassed.
Boston plays a short bench. They traded numerous bench players at the deadline for one Derrick White. Pritchard and Theis have given them nothing in this series. They never play Nesmith. They play hard defensively, but with a short bench, that wears on you. Plus the back-to-back 7 game series against two physical opponents with almost no rest for three weeks. Those are many of the reasons their offense looks tired.
They need to find a real PG in the offseason. Tatum and Brown need to work on their handles and decision making. Smart needs to play a Bruce Bowen type role. Just shoot open shots and play defense. Putting the ball in his hands a lot is not a good idea.
Also, Robert Williams is unreliable. Always injured and it's doubtful he'll grow healthier as he ages. He can't play big minutes. They should think about moving him while they can get assets in return. It sucks moving such a unique, athletic player, but he's a brokedick. [Reply]
I think the biggest difference between Lebron and Curry is this:
LeBron forced his teams to make roster moves to his liking and when they didn't work out, left. Examples: Tristan Thompson on cavs, the entire Lakers roster, the heat after it became apparent that bosh wasn't that useful and dwade was too old.
Curry didn't. Example: wanted Bradley over GPII. Yes Curry helped bring in KD but he wouldn't have complained about lack of support if he hadn't signed.
Lebron is a great player (the undisputed #2 of all time) but he's been a terrible associate gm aside from convincing his buddies to play for less money in Miami. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Superturtle:
Still waiting for the explanation as to why Durant's super team was so much worse than Lebron's.
Reminder:
Durant's iteration of a super team involved him signing a max deal with the best team in free agency.
Lebron's iteration of a super team involved outright collusion over multiple years with other super stars, including blatant tampering and salary cap manipulation.
Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
Curry had the 2nd best player in the league brought to him to add on to his 73 win team. Yeah, I'd probably not leave that situation either.
And then he had the 2nd best player leave... did you hear any grumbling. Any remarks about how the team needed to make changes? Did you hear him demanding or pushing the team to trade young assets for proven veterans? [Reply]
Originally Posted by tyecopeland:
And then he had the 2nd best player leave... did you hear any grumbling. Any remarks about how the team needed to make changes? Did you hear him demanding or pushing the team to trade young assets for proven veterans?
He played with 2 other HOFers in addition to Durant. The Warriors have the highest payroll in the sport. What was he going to grumble about? [Reply]
Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
He played with 2 other HOFers in addition to Durant. The Warriors have the highest payroll in the sport. What was he going to grumble about?
Have you listened to yourself in this thread? You sound like windhorst. He claimed the game 5 win was a "checkbook win" because most teams can't afford their 4th best player to be a $30 million per year guy then turned around and said the Celtics are the better team. Similarly you are saying Curry can't complain about the roster but have been talking about how the Warriors aren't actually that good behind Curry. Which is it?
If klay and Draymond have fallen off (they have to some extent) and Wiggins is so soft (he can be) and Poole is a liability (in some matchups) and their depth is lacking (debatable) than Curry could definitely have clamored to flip the young guys (or the picks during the draft) to improve the team.... you know like how Lebron encouraged the Lakers to get rid of all their promising young talent. [Reply]
Originally Posted by tyecopeland:
Have you listened to yourself in this thread? You sound like windhorst. He claimed the game 5 win was a "checkbook win" because most teams can't afford their 4th best player to be a $30 million per year guy then turned around and said the Celtics are the better team. Similarly you are saying Curry can't complain about the roster but have been talking about how the Warriors aren't actually that good behind Curry. Which is it?
I don't know about a "checkbook win," but the Warriors have the highest payroll in the league and their ability to spend has allowed them to keep the players around that will appease Curry. We're not exactly talking about a "Mo Williams as a #2 in Cleveland" situation here. It's one of the greatest dynasties in NBA history, what is he supposed to be unhappy about?
The fact that Draymond and Klay have now age declined to the point that Wiggins is better than them doesn't mean that they didn't used to be great players worth that money or that they still can't significantly contribute to a championship right now (which they are doing, particularly given their own basketball intelligence and the Celtics' inexperience and propensity to choke under pressure). [Reply]
Originally Posted by Superturtle:
Still waiting for the explanation as to why Durant's super team was so much worse than Lebron's.
Reminder:
Durant's iteration of a super team involved him signing a max deal with the best team in free agency.
Lebron's iteration of a super team involved outright collusion over multiple years with other super stars, including blatant tampering and salary cap manipulation.
they really used KD as a superweapon to beat LeBron then discarded him like a used condom afterwards. Really sick shit. This is why I'll never respect the Warriors.
