- Joined
- Aug 13, 2001
- Posts
- 5,840
Something is starting to annoy me, but I might be alone in this one, tho'. I keep seeing shows and analists saying that Golden State needed 4 All Stars to just beat Lebron. While that's an overtly dramatic narrative, the first thing that popped into my head was "Wait a second... they did that with 3 back in 2015 when LeBron ran out of gas." And in 2016 it took the comeback of the century and both Love and Irving playing lights out to defeat a GS squad with a suspended (for one game, sure) Dreymond and a hurt (by most accounts) Curry. Even if you want to go with "no way he was hurt" (fine by me), that just means that it still took a MASSIVE effort and Love and Irving to play the series of their lifetime to defeat GS. 3 All Stars vs. 3 All Stars.
What I'm trying to say is that the narrative that it took 4 All Stars to beat Lebron is stupid and makes no sense. What I'm saying is that it took GS 4 All Stars to defeat 3 All Stars. And I dunno about you, but that's solid math to me.
(If you want to argue that Love isn't an All Star, I guess that means his 2016 finals run was just a fluke?)
It bothers me too, although in 2015, Love and Irving were hurt so it was basically Lebron against the whole team. Last year, Warriors were up 3-1 until Green decided to go WWE and they lost one of the big guys to injury. Frankly, I think they choked.