NBA GMs Across League Fill Out Their Survey

Steezo said:

Yea but Dell Jr played all 6 games; Love and Irving only played one game between them in those Finals, you can't be serious comparing injuries like that.......

AFA the '11 Finals, all I really wanted to know was about any other superstars playing such below their standards as LeBron did in an NBA Finals setting. You'll probably say "whatever, doesn't matter, etc", but just a simple question, lol

And I don't see how you can compare Jordan's first LOA when he was 30, to the 2nd one when he was 36 and having played 13 seasons already, plus with Pippen just exiting his prime with beginning back problems. I don't really subscribe to Jordan's 2nd LOA anyways outside of the Knicks, I just brought that up to demonstrate a circumstance (our last Finals appearances since the days of Willis Reed). The fact remains that our only Finals apperances coincided with Jordan not playing at all (and for the record I do believe had Jordan not left in '98 the Bulls would've beaten us yet again in '99), and Houston only won titles when Jordan didn't play a full season. How one chooses to view that is entirely up to the eye of the beholder

Click to expand...

RunningJumper said:

Yes, it would have been interesting what LeBron would have done if he played as he does usually, but he was there. Alive and in the flesh. He didn't play well. I mean, we all know J.R. Smith can be nearly unstoppable, but a lot of times his head's not in it. He's no LeBron James, but it happens to everyone. Maybe LeBron got nervous, had a lot of pressure, he didn't overcome it that year. Confidence and focus is just as important as dribbling and shooting skills, that year, he didn't have it enough.

I agree 100% that if Love and Irving were healthy they would have have given the Warriors a MUCH bigger challenge, even with Irving alone, but if you want to go back to LeBron's sub-par performance in the '11 Finals, then you can say the same about Curry, Klay, and I think Draymond Green as well. I mean seriously, if the Warriors were at their best it could have been a sweep, no disrespect to the Cavs.

Trust me, I get where you're coming from, but at least the '11 Finals, you gotta give the Mavs their due. Even before they faced they Heat, they pulled off some incredible victories.

Click to expand...

RunningJumper said:

There are some scenarios that you can make the argument about luck, having an less hard route to a championship, etc. The Warriors though won 67 games in the regular season, and won the championship. The Cavs' injuries sure did have an impact, but Curry wasn't even at his best during the series, a lot of it anyway, and they won. They had a lot of weapons. Don't forget that they changed up the line-up, starting Iguodala and on LeBron, which had such an impact that he won the Finals MVP.

And the Mavs/LeBron 2011 Finals thing, you can't even make that argument. You know why? LeBron played, he was healthy, it doesn't MATTER how he usually plays, he played unusual, and it wasn't good. There is no what if scenario there. LeBron had his chance. It doesn't matter that it was the Heat's first year, LeBron won MVP twice before joining the Heat, he was a veteran in his first year of the Heat, he just didn't play that well.

The Spurs missed free throws at the end of Game 6 in the 2013 Finals. They were up five points with what? Thirty something seconds to go? They missed free throws, and lost that game. The Spurs had another chance to prove they were the best, they didn't win. It doesn't matter if the best player in basketball doesn't play well, or players who don't usually don't miss free throws miss free throws, the fact is, it happened, it wasn't unfair, it happened. The better team won. What is potential, what is the usual, they don't matter. What matters is what was. They had their chance!

On top of the first gap without Jordan, we can talk about what if Jordan played with the Bulls in the 1998-1999 season? They just went 62-20 in the regular season with Jordan being the scoring champion, MVP, and Finals MVP, in which they won the championship in Game 6. He didn't play though. I've thought about Jordan's first gap before, but it doesn't matter. He didn't play.

Yes, I UNDERSTAND people's opinions and feelings in some scenarios, but things happen. Unless a pretty obvious mediocre team won the title, you have to give teams credit.

Click to expand...

Steezo said:

All I'm asking is, what was great about the teams Houston and GS beat. Forget the seeding for a moment, I'd just like to know what was great about the teams Houston beat both years, and what was great about the teams GS beat this past spring

Click to expand...

Steezo said:

I'm sure Dell's numbers would've changed had GS lost, however just judging his numbers and play in the Finals, he played well overall. I believe it was him that cost GS a game in a Finals OT loss, and he had his other hiccups, but full-circle he was arguably the Finals MVP (I put the emphasis on arguably, I don't have a particular opinion on this ATM)

I do believe Cleveland would've won had they been healthy, regardless of what the Warriors would've done, injuries or play-wise. I really like Irving, he is bad

As far what I bolded, I never once even doubted what Dallas pulled off before the final round. Slightly off-topic, but the only problem I have in regards to revisionist history, is the they were anything but favorites against Portland. I'm pretty sure the Mavericks were favored to beat a team with a hobbled Brandon Roy and a Greg Oden on permanent vacation. Beating Portland was nothing special. Otherwise Dirk's offense and the defensive stand provided by Kidd & Marion in taking out the defending World Champs and Oklahoma City was very impressive, there's nothing anyone can take away from that

Click to expand...

Tkf said:

so if it is phoney, why watch? why root for the knicks to win anything? I just don't get your logic here... Im sorry

Click to expand...