The Finals 2016

[Sabo]

Serious question: Was the Cavs-Warriors series the best NBA Finals series ever?

- The Cavs were down 3-1 against a team that won 73 regular season games, and won two of the last three games on the road. They became the first NBA team to ever win the title after being down 3-1.

- It included the two best basketball players on the planet, with one player in his prime and the other starting the downside of his career.

- The margin of victory for the entire series was only four points.

- Game seven was a close game throughout. The biggest lead for the game was the Warriors winning by seven at halftime.

- The only real negative I can think of is none of the first six games were very close.

[Jerloma]

- The only real negative I can think of is none of the first six games were very close.

Which is exactly why it wasn't the greatest series ever. I mean, that's an enormous negative.

[Joe K]

If I can be allowed one moment of hubris: I see little question that if some newcomer watched all 7 games of this series and has any doubt about who the best basketball player on earth is, they were not watching the same thing as I did. Curry almost unquestionably the greatest shooter I've ever seen, but when you don't get good looks, the best shooters look human. Lebron did not look human in the last three games.

Such a great great series.

LeBron was awesome. I thought Curry had surpassed him coming into this season due to a drop off in LeBron's offensive efficiency and defensive impact. But he ramped up his efficiency in the postseason and was a total force on defense in the Finals. To me, this series and playoff run cements him as the 2nd best player of all-time. Admittedly, I'm only 31 years old so I didn't see Kareem or Wilt and barely saw Magic or Bird. But it's just hard for me to imagine anyone being able to influence as many facets of the game as LeBron can.

[Giff]

Who knew this play would help determine this year's champion.

[mister d]

Which is exactly why it wasn't the greatest series ever. I mean, that's an enormous negative.

But didn't GS's early dominance make the eventual comeback even bigger?



(I watched the last 10:00 last night so I'm pretty qualified to discuss this.)

[Ryan]

I'm picking the '84 Finals by a factor of 30.

(I watch it once about every 2 months so I'm extremely unbiased to discuss this.)

(This probably wasn't even the best LeBron finals. 2013 was insanity.)

[Johnnie]

- The only real negative I can think of is none of the first six games were very close.

Which is exactly why it wasn't the greatest series ever. I mean, that's an enormous negative.

As a very casual fan, all I read about the series after two games was that it was poop and uneventful. After the Cavs won game 3, it was being called a "Gentleman's sweep" or something by someone on a podcast I listened to. So, unless every game was like game 7, it's pretty standard. Only when you take into context the entire season can you make the argument, IMO.

And even then, the Warriors lost 9 regular season games and 9 games in the playoffs. So what does that say about the league to allow a 73 win team in the first place?

[brian]

Even the Cavaliers were in no hurry to get back to Cleveland.

[Jerloma]

I really like LeBron but that drama queen shit before the free throws has to stop. Surely, he thought he was throwing down an alley-oop dunk on Draymond to seal it and it would have been an epic moment but it didn't happen. So then he decided to try to make his own drama by writhing around in pain for 5 minutes.

[Joe K]

- The only real negative I can think of is none of the first six games were very close.

Which is exactly why it wasn't the greatest series ever. I mean, that's an enormous negative.

And even then, the Warriors lost 9 regular season games and 9 games in the playoffs. So what does that say about the league to allow a 73 win team in the first place?

To this point, the five best teams this year (Cavs, Warriors, Thunder, Spurs, pre-injuries Clips) were way better than everyone else. I mean the Raptors were the sixth best team and they looked really bad at times this postseason. I think the top-heavy nature of the league made it easier for the Warriors (and also Spurs) to have really great regular seasons. (Although in fairness to the Warriors, they also dominated the other top teams during the regular season.) The Thunder and Cavs could have also easily won 60+ games if they had less injuries/dysfunction/bad luck in close games.

[Johnnie]

Agree with all points made there. It certainly is top heavy.

Also, I don't watch TV, but Beads is in trouble!

[A_B]

Troll much, Lebron?

[Joe K]

A few advanced stats on this year's Finals that may interest only me:

-Golden State's offensive efficiency was actually better in this year's Finals (108.5 pts/100 possessions) than it was in last year's finals (107.3). The difference was that Cleveland's offensive efficiency was way better in this year's finals (109.1) as compared to last year's Finals (99.6, which is 76ers-level).

-Both teams' offensive efficiency in the Finals would've ranked in the top-7 in the NBA for the regular season. Given the way that the physicality ramps up in the playoffs, that's pretty good offense.

-The average pace of play for the Finals was very slow. (92 possessions/game, slower than every team other than Utah played in the regular season.) Golden State was the second fastest team and Cleveland the fourth slowest team during the regular season, so Cleveland definitely got the pace they wanted for the Finals.

-Unsurprisingly, the advanced player metrics (Game Score) say that LeBron was by far the best player in the Finals. Kyrie was second, followed by Draymond. Draymond likely would've finished above Kyrie had he not been suspended for a game.

[Jerloma]

LeBron led every player on either team in points, boards, assists, blocks, and steals. That's absolutely fucking insane. Surely, that's never been done before, right? Unless it was done by him. I can't even think of anyone else who could realistically do that. Maybe Bird?

[A_B]

LeBron led every player on either team in points, boards, assists, blocks, and steals. That's absolutely fucking insane. Surely, that's never been done before, right? Unless it was done by him. I can't even think of anyone else who could realistically do that. Maybe Bird?

No, this was the first time. He did all but blocks last year, though.

[Ryan]

Even if you've got the all-around game, you still need your own team and the other team to lack a specialist like Rodman or Stockton. It's athletically impressive and damn near statistically impossible, especially across the full 7 games.

[A_B]

Even if you've got the all-around game, you still need your own team and the other team to lack a specialist like Rodman or Stockton. It's athletically impressive and damn near statistically impossible, especially across the full 7 games.

I'm too lazy to go check, but it's possible that he did it over the 13 games of both season's Finals, too.

[Sabo]

[Brontoburglar]

http://www.twincities.com/2016/06/21/so ... ch-to-ask/

Because only the Cavs, or other celebrities, would be able to have such impact. Kids don’t care if you wear a suit to work every day. You are just a dad or an uncle or a neighbor going to a job that nobody sees. But J.R. Smith, now he’s somebody different. He just won an NBA title and every kid who knows the sport will know that, and more importantly, take note. Of everything.

It was a great title run by the Cavs. It isn’t too much to ask that when you get home with the trophy you at least give some weight to the moment by wearing a shirt.

[rass]

Cleveland...

[A_B]

[Rex]

Perhaps we should have known that the Warriors were just being ironic all along!