OT: What's Worse? 2007 Patriots (18-1) or GSW Losing This Year?

Submitted by BursleyBaitsBus on

I'm kind of in awe of how well Billy Donovan got OKC playing right now. Also in shock at how poor GSW is playing. So much for the small ball line up. 

 

I guess this would be worse. 73-9 in the regular season to not even make it to the Finals? Yikes. 

On a side note, the NBA playoffs in both conferences have suddenly gotten super interesting given how many blowouts we've seen this year. 

Ty Butterfield

May 25th, 2016 at 1:06 AM ^

They are both equally bad. Winning all those games and possibly a conference title don't mean crap if you can't finish. I would say the same thing if it was Michigan. National title or bust.

ijohnb

May 25th, 2016 at 10:17 AM ^

Kerr made a mistake by playing for the record.  It gave the team an artificial finish line and they have not looked like the same team in the playoffs.  What is crazy is that conventional thinking is that once they get back to California they will return with a fury and get back in the series, but at the current time my guess would be that they are going to return and get blasted by 20 to wrap up the series.  It does not appear flukish, it appears as though they flat out can't matchup with OKC personnel and are overmatched in nearly every facet.  It is also becomming clear that Draymond Green is not this combo pack of Wilt Chamberlain, Magic Johnson, and Larry Bird (only faster) all rolled into one.  Man, the hyperbole that is used to describe his game is something to behold.

Pit2047

May 25th, 2016 at 1:46 PM ^

They haven't looked like they have all season because Curry was hurt the first two rounds and OKC has been a bad match up for them. This has nothing to do with going for 73 wins. KD on Draymond has completely taken of the game and he's a HUGE piece of their offense. The Curry-Green pick and roll has been unstoppable for 2 years and the Thunder have shut it down. This isn't about mental make up or fatigue or any number of excuse. OKC is just a bad match up for GSW and they are playing their best basketball.

MGoGrendel

May 25th, 2016 at 10:50 AM ^

Seattle had a record 116 wins and didn't get to play in the World Series.  That was bad.  If (IF!!) the GSW don't make it to the Final's, that would be worse than the Patriots loss in the Super Bowl.

Our 9/10U baseball team has won the regular season 3 out of the last 4 times.  We've won the tournament only once.  The tourney trophy trumps the three 1st place trophies.  You only get on the park Facebook page for winning the tourney!!

hailtothevictors08

May 25th, 2016 at 11:16 AM ^

Playoffs are not the best way to find the best team. The NBA's is the least bad but take baseball, you play 162 and then have a best of 5. Come on, it is entertaining but not a good way of finding a champion.

 
 
NBA should go to 87 games, no playoffs, no conferences. Play each team three times and the best record is the champion.

Bambi

May 25th, 2016 at 12:00 PM ^

They're only stupid if you think the point is to have the best team win every year.

I don't think anyone thinks that the best team wins every year in any playoff format. The best teams generally make it, but then between luck and who's hot at the right time, anyone can win it.

The point of the playoffs is essentially entertainment. It gives you more games to watch, and at what's perceived to be higher stakes so the games or more interesting. You may not always get the best team winning it all the time, but you get more great games between the top teams and more of the sport, whichever one it may be.

Personally I'd rather it stay this way, and I think most people agree. Sure the best team might not always win, but that's kind of a draw for a lot of people. You don't have to be the best for an entire season, just get in and then anything can happen. That means a lot more teams have the hope of winning it all for a longer time, which increases interest in the league.

The playoffs also lead to high quality games between highly qualified teams. You have to be one of the X best teams to make the playoffs, so you have good teams playing the games which more often than not means an competitive game. Then add in the playoff drama factor, especially in elimination games, and the possibility for upsets, and you get something both the fans and leagues enjoy.

Also playoffs increase parity. The reason Leicester City was also incredible this year is because in the past 20 years, only 4/5 EPL teams won the title. It's a monopoly at the top. People already complain about the NBA having no parity since a LeBron led team has made the finals 6 straight years. Now imagine how boring it would be if the same 4/5 teams won the title every year in every sport.

Jonesy

May 25th, 2016 at 5:27 PM ^

Every game of baseball is pure randomness, the results at the end of the season are little different from flipping a coin.  Stupid game.  No need for 162 games of that crap dominating my airwaves and preempting my radio shows, switch it to 16 and give each team 1 pitcher a la footballs 1 qb.

USAFA007

May 25th, 2016 at 1:06 AM ^

I think 18-1 is worse. That close to perfection. Even if they won it all GSW would not be a slam dunk greatest team of all time. They'd be in the discussion, but those 96 bulls and the 11 in a row Celtics, not to mention the 69 win lakers or the Kobe/shaq teams all have a case to make. No one would have disputed 19-0.

OwenGoBlue

May 25th, 2016 at 1:56 PM ^

Pats also lost to a very average Giants team that barely made the playoffs so that makes their loss worse. And it's never one play; they blew plenty of chances that game, and then again in their next SB loss to another average Giants team. OKC has two top 5 players/future HOFers and just took out the other prohibitive favorite team in the Spurs.

PopeLando

May 25th, 2016 at 10:18 AM ^

I was at that game. I don't really remember all the details. Johnny Sears' absolute incompetence stands out (will never forget/forgive). The blocked field goal too. But mostly I remember how quiet it was. The walk home to my house on Packard. My housemate had bought a keg for tailgating - he came home, dragged the keg into his room, and we didn't see him again until the next day. Trigger warning ;)

drjaws

May 25th, 2016 at 1:14 AM ^

Pats for sure.

GS can rattle off 3 straight if they re-learn to hit 3s. Curry is a liability when he doesn't hit his 3s.

OKC - Cavs would be nice. All the Cavs fans may wish they never said they'd rather play OKC than GS the way the Thunder are playing right now.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

BursleyBaitsBus

May 25th, 2016 at 4:34 AM ^

That's not happening anytime soon. 

Jerry West went 1-8 in Finals... one series in which he was the only player in NBA history to win MVP on the losing team, something Lebron almost came close to last year. 

I don't see 4 more losses in Finals for Lebron either. 

Yo_Blue

May 25th, 2016 at 7:27 AM ^

I think people were fine with Lebron until he made a monkey rodeo out of his decision to leave Cleveland.  His nationwide tour and then ESPN special for The Decision on where he was taking his talents.  After that, he opened his yap to proclaim just how many NBA Titles he would win.  THAT'S where he lost me.

mh277907

May 25th, 2016 at 7:44 AM ^

The Decision is really why people don't like him? Really? I mean I get why people from Cleveland were upset by that (prior to his return) but why would anyone else still have an issue with that? One of the greatest basketball players of all time took some bad advice, came off as arrogant in announcing his plans to win multiple championships when he was at the ripe age of 25, oh, and raised a couple million for charity in doing so... Makes zero sense to me. 

As for my guess as to why he gets a lot of hate? A) he is still probably the best basketball player on Earth. B) he is dramatic- on the court and off. I personally think some of his on the court antics are justified as I think he is fouled more than almost anyone in the league but because of his size and athleticism a lot of the calls aren't made. Off the court, he acts like a high school girl at times. All of the drama with his coaches, with Kevin Love, etc.gets really annoying. And finally, C) he isn't afraid to let people know that he considers himself the best player on Earth. 

mh277907

May 25th, 2016 at 8:09 AM ^

You specifically said that he lost you after The Decision and his Miami party where he announced his plans to win multiple championships. If that is truly the reason why you don't like him, and it has nothing to do with the other factors that I listed, it seems awfully petty to me. In a world where most celebrities and high profile athletes seem to be awful human beings, I don't think Lebron has done a bad job considering he has been on cover of magazines since he was 16. 

BigBlue02

May 25th, 2016 at 10:18 AM ^

So are you actually questioning why a guy you yourself said was an arrogant asshole is disliked? Also, you missed the fact that he flops and flops horribly. I dislike him because he is the best player in the world and he whines like a bitch. Getting his coach fired doesn't do much for his likability either

mh277907

May 25th, 2016 at 11:07 AM ^

No. I am arguing that disliking him solely because of The Decision is a lame reason to dislike him. I then offered up reasons that I consider are legitimate reasons as to why someone would not like Lebron. Also, I mentioned his on the court antics as being over the top. That would include his flopping. I also mentioned his drama with coaches... 

BigBlue02

May 25th, 2016 at 11:12 AM ^

Disliking him solely for the decision is dumb, but when he does something like the decision, he opens himself to criticism. Then he does everything else you and numerous other people have mentioned and the decision just makes him look like an idiot. I don't see why you singled out the decision as an outlier of why people can dislike him. If someone wants to look at the decision and say "I don't like LeBron because that backs up what I thought about him being a selfish arrogant prick" I'm not sure why you would question that considering you have a laundry list yourself of reasons to dislike him

mh277907

May 25th, 2016 at 12:20 PM ^

Read the thread. Another poster stated that he/she didn't like Lebron because of The Decision. I was responding to him/her. If that is part of the reason why you don't like him, coupled with the other things that I have mentioned, I think that is reasonable. Even as a Cavs fan, Lebron gets on my nerves at times. But he is one of the most disliked athletes today and I don't think it is all that fair. By nearly all accounts, he seems to be a pretty damn decent human being all things considered. It is easy for us to say that he is arrogant but how could he not be? He has been compared to Michael Jordan since he was 16. He is worth nearly a billion dollars. But he stays out of trouble with the law, he is still with the mother of his children, and seems to be a great father. That is saying a lot for most big time celebrities and athletes nowadays. 

BigBlue02

May 25th, 2016 at 1:41 PM ^

I did read the thread. Maybe you should take your own advice. The poster you are referring to said the decision is where LeBron lost a lot of people, including him. That doesn't mean people dislike him solely because of the decision. That means that makes LeBron look like an asshole and people started to dislike him. Someone disliking someone doesn't have to have an exact start, middle, and end. I started to dislike LeBron because of the decision. That doesn't mean that is the only thing that makes me dislike him. There are plenty of reasons to dislike him, the decision only made it much easier to. Although being a Cavs fan probably explains why you are defending him, so I get it.

MichiganTeacher

May 25th, 2016 at 8:12 AM ^

I have mixed feelings about LeBron, and none of them are too strong.

I'm just posting to point out that using age as an excuse for a 25-year-old is an insult to 25-year-olds (and younger). 25-year-olds are at the peak of their intellectual powers: Einstein, Byron, Godel, etc. 

Sports players have no excuse in peaking at an early age. Genius-level talent does that in almost every field. Even if you're not a genius in your field, you're more than capable - years and years and years more than capable - of functioning on your own at age 25, but that's verging into off-topic territory.

mh277907

May 25th, 2016 at 8:20 AM ^

I wasn't attacking Lebron's intelligence. I was saying he was immature. I don't think anyone hits peak maturity at 25. We all do things when we are young that we regret later in life. I am sure Einstein, Byron, and Godel are no different.