Dream Team 4: Golden State Warriors

[Lyst]

2 stars? C'mon now. We're talking about 2 top 5 players in the league. Serge Ibaka should be more than enough as your 3rd best player when your top 2 are Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook.

The roster was clearly good enough to go up 3-1 against the 73-9 Warriors before Durant shrunk.

I'm not sure how you can argue the points being made in here...LeBron going to the Heat is, objectively, not the proper comparison to make from the 2010 offseason. It's if LeBron went to the Big 3 Celtics. It's the perfect comparison.

If you disagree with that comparison please explain why.

Right now we are discussing why the Thunder never excelled and won it all.

You really want to say Ibaka was a star or their big 3rd, then I give up. That's about the most overrating i've ever heard.

And I don't care how great Russ and KD were, read the rest of my post. You need more than 2 stars to win it all. Especially with the super-team era that we are in. Not sure why this is so difficult for some people on here to understand.

 

[Lyst]

The Thunder were more than happy with Status Quo. They would only put ok - good roleplayers around Russ and KD. They would not pay Harden. Or take any risks or pay money for any other star.

Thunder organization is why Durant left. Same reason why LBJ left Cleveland, we weren't putting enough star pieces around him to win it all.

 

[chrisrich91]

Right now we are discussing why the Thunder never excelled and won it all.

You really want to say Ibaka was a star or their big 3rd, then I give up. That's about the most overrating i've ever heard.

And I don't care how great Russ and KD were, read the rest of my post. You need more than 2 stars to win it all. Especially with the super-team era that we are in. Not sure why this is so difficult for some people on here to understand.

Sure, you need more than 2 stars if your stars are Kyle Lowry and DeMar DeRozan.

We're talking about 2 top 5 players in the league. And I think arguing this mythical 'takes more than 2 stars to win a title' claim exists is just making excuses for the Thunder. Russell and Kevin choked that series away. Then Kevin went and joined the enemy.

With the Thunder up 3-1 they couldn't close it out. In fact, Durant went 12 of 31 from the field in Game 5 and 10 of 31 from the field in Game 6 allowing the series to go back to Oakland for Game 7 at which point it was a wrap.

2 stars should have been plenty to beat the 73-9 Warriors. Which means that for all intents and purposes, those 2 stars surrounded by role players was actually PLENTY to win a championship. It only took a historic choke job to prevent it.

I completely disagree with everything you're saying.

 

[Lyst]

I completely disagree with everything you're saying.

I figured you would, I am expecting a lot of disagrees to come. Common sense is hard to find on this board in certain circumstances.

You want to believe that just two stars can take out super-teams of today by themselves without a 3rd real star option, go ahead and believe that. Facts will tell you differently. And the fact that players get tired and need another option to control the ball and score will tell you differently as well. Exactly why Lebron could not win a championship ever without 2 other stars.

 

[chrisrich91]

I figured you would, I am expecting a lot of disagrees to come. Common sense is hard to find on this board in certain circumstances.

You want to believe that just two stars can take out super-teams of today by themselves without a 3rd real star option, go ahead and believe that. Facts will tell you differently. And the fact that players get tired and need another option to control the ball and score will tell you differently as well. Exactly why Lebron could not win a championship ever without 2 other stars.

The fact that you continue to avoid answering my question as to why Russ and KD was enough to get the Warriors down 3-1 but not 4-1 tells me enough.

Apparently the reason Durant started shooting 30% from the field is because there's a line in the sand between Games 4 and 5 of the Western Conference Finals where your measly 2 stars just get dead tired because they don't have a 3rd star to lean on. EXCUSES.

You're going to die on this 2 stars hill because it's the only way to defend the atrocity of what Kevin Durant did. The bitch choked and then did the unthinkable.

I'm done with this "argument".

 

[Lyst]

The fact that you continue to avoid answering my question as to why Russ and KD was enough to get the Warriors down 3-1 but not 4-1 tells me enough.

Apparently the reason Durant started shooting 30% from the field is because there's a line in the sand between Games 4 and 5 of the Western Conference Finals where your measly 2 stars just get dead tired because they don't have a 3rd star to lean on. EXCUSES.

You're going to die on this 2 stars hill because it's the only way to defend the atrocity of what Kevin Durant did. The bitch choked and then did the unthinkable.

I'm done with this "argument".

Relying completely on one star's play will get you hurt in the end. Aka Lebron every time he's been in the playoffs without 2 other legit stars around him.

Last time I checked it took insane game-changing plays by Irving, Love, AND Lebron that only stars could make to get us our barely won down to the wire championship.

Btw the last time the Thunder touched the finals Harden was on their team. And they let him go. To never put another star around Russ or Durant again........

 

[Cavatt]

Did they make the Finals that year? Or win the Finals?

So irrelevant. You can't completely rely on 2 stars, and a bunch of roleplayers. Read the rest of my post.

Who was the 3rd star on the Lakers team with Shaq and Kobe? Who was the star on the 2004 Pistons team?

It doesn't matter what the stars are, it is the competition. Cavs with Kyrie and Love would have been favorites in any finals that didn't have Shaq in it for the last 20 years, but they ran into a historically great team. Hakeem won with how many stars, but it was because Jordan wasn't playing.

I mean the answer to your question is "it depends on the competition".

The idea that KD couldn't have shot any better in those last 3 games is pretty wild. That was totally winnable, they could have won at home, but they didn't.

 

[Lyst]

Who was the 3rd star on the Lakers team with Shaq and Kobe? Who was the star on the 2004 Pistons team?

It doesn't matter what the stars are, it is the competition. Cavs with Kyrie and Love would have been favorites in any finals that didn't have Shaq in it for the last 20 years, but they ran into a historically great team. Hakeem won with how many stars, but it was because Jordan wasn't playing.

I mean the answer to your question is "it depends on the competition".

The idea that KD couldn't have shot any better in those last 3 games is pretty wild. That was totally winnable, they could have won at home, but they didn't.

Ok I named 5 teams in recent years and you named 1 (Lakers). Pistons is going too far back to be "recent years". and Hakeem, obviously if Pistons are too far back than ya.

I'm talking about the era we are in right now.

Excuses are endless for why Thunder could not do it all of these years with Russ and KD, beside the fact that their roster was just not built well enough.

 

[Cavatt]

Ok I named 5 teams in recent years and you named 1 (Lakers). Pistons is going too far back to be "recent years". and Hakeem, obviously if Pistons are too far back than ya.

I'm talking about the era we are in right now.

Excuses are endless for why Thunder could not do it all of these years with Russ and KD, beside the fact that their roster was just not built well enough.

We can argue all day about it obviously. Before 2016 it was impossible to come back from 3-1, so definitive statements in sports are really not worth much.

Do you think the Thunder have a better chance of getting to the finals this year because they have 3 stars than they did when they were up 3-1?

 

[Lyst]

Do you think the Thunder have a better chance of getting to the finals this year because they have 3 stars than they did when they were up 3-1?

That's a good question. The answer is yes I do actually believe they have a better chance. This is their first year together though, and usually with these super-teams aligning- they just are not ready to win it the first year. (Heat could not, Cavs could not.)

 

[6.19.2016]

We can argue all day about it obviously. Before 2016 it was impossible to come back from 3-1, so definitive statements in sports are really not worth much.

Do you think the Thunder have a better chance of getting to the finals this year because they have 3 stars than they did when they were up 3-1?

They still only have 2.5 tops...Carmelo doesn't really count.

You can potentially get by with 2-2.5, as the Thunder team that had GSW on the ropes did, but your #1 needs to be exceptional and your #2 has to be near-exceptional, and the rest of your team has to be the best "rest of the team" in the league. I still think LBJ+KLove+the new crew has a shot of fitting this category.

I only really see GSW as 3 1/3 as Draymond and Klay only count as 2/3 each by these metrics, but their "rest of the team" has always also been top-tier, albeit this year slipping a bit.

 

[Cavatt]

They still only have 2.5 tops...Carmelo doesn't really count.

You can potentially get by with 2-2.5, as the Thunder team that had GSW on the ropes did, but your #1 needs to be exceptional and your #2 has to be near-exceptional, and the rest of your team has to be the best "rest of the team" in the league. I still think LBJ+KLove+the new crew has a shot of fitting this category.

I only really see GSW as 3 1/3 as Draymond and Klay only count as 2/3 each by these metrics, but their "rest of the team" has always also been top-tier, albeit this year slipping a bit.

Adams is Elite, but maybe not a star. It will be interesting to see how Melo and Paul play on the postseason.

 

[And1]

"NOTHING for countless years"? Seriously?

Ignoring the fact that Durant already had a teammate who was a top 5-10 player in the league when he left...

The Thunder had James Harden early on. Obviously he didn't stick around.

Ibaka was one of the league's best shot blockers with OKC.

They grabbed Adams, and he has since developed into one of the league's top bigs.

They addressed needs every single year. They traded for Waiters, then got Oladipo to replace him. They got Kanter.

Roberson is one of the best perimeter defenders in the league.

This idea that the Thunder were devoid of talent is just laughable. They didn't blow that lead to Golden State because of their roster - they blew it because their best players (especially Durant) choked.

This all day

 

[Cassity14]

This all day

Nah man! It was clearly not Durant's problem that he shot a whopping 43% from the field and 28% from 3 for the entire postseason that year. Silly Thunder didn't put any talent around him! Definitely not one of the best defensive teams in the league, a walking double-double center, a shot blocking stretch 4, and a future MVP winner!

Durant couldn't hit water falling out of a boat, but his team let him down!!

/s

 

[JMoneyYourHoney]

This "need 3 stars to win" theory is absolute shit. What good is that if your third star doesn't play like one?

You can't begin to use Kevin Love as evidence to support that theory. I love the guy and he had a crucial play in Game 7 but our title was the result of a brilliant 2-man act between LeBron and Kyrie. They closed the deal while Durant and Westbrook couldn't. Tristan Thompson and Richard Jefferson, role players if there ever were any, were more integral to our title that year than Love.

This post isn't designed to impugn Love in any way. I really like the guy and will acknowledge that he contributed. I'm merely shooting holes in this dude's wild theory.

What quantifies a "star" anyways? Love wasn't an all-star that year. Ibaka was a 4x 1st-team All-Defense. Are we going to keep splitting hairs here?