NBA / NCAA Basketball

[Merckx index]

I can´t help myself but it seems americans (more than europeans to my surprise) can get distracted (and manipulated into one direction) easily from real problems with gossip non issues.

I strongly disagree. Sure, stories like this are titillating to the masses, and compared to situations like the Ukraine, where people are dying, they may seem trivial. But it's cases like Sterling's where our views on civil liberties are shaped. Arguments over whether or not he should lose his ownership because of something he said in a private conversation reveal a great deal about how we feel about racism, the rich vs. poor gap, right to privacy, free speech, and a host of other issues.

American laws and mores are not made in a vacuum. They're formed in response to public debates like these. And the laws and the mores that ultimately result are a major reason why America, despite its economic stranglehold on much of the rest of the world, still maintains a certain level of respect and admiration abroad.

Your man-crush Putin presides over a country where gays are routinely victimized. The vociferous debates that emerge in America whenever a minority group is perceived to be oppressed help to guarantee that that kind of situation isn't tolerated here.

Once the guy does indeed talk about it (being in privacy or not), the law has its rights to prevent such guy from doing harm to kids.

Yet you don’t apply the same logic to Sterling.

And that lines had been drawn, and the USA lived very well with it. What´s next? Our kids are thought being gay is good. Some people are against it. Should they be stripped of their jobs and properties just b/c they do the serious mind crime of thinking different than the new wave minorities?

It’s the gays and other minorities who have had to worry about being stripped of their jobs. The owner of the Orlando Magic has spoken out against gay marriage, but I’m quite sure his position is not threatened. I’ll grant you there was a recent high profile case in Silicon Valley where a CEO of a tech company was forced to resign because of his views on this issue. But again, you yourself admit there are forms of thought that preclude someone from holding certain jobs.

Sometimes we have to choose, Foxxy. Sometimes the choice is between the rights of a minority to have the same opportunities and benefits that everyone else has vs. those who think those opportunities and benefits should be restricted. I don’t find it hard to decide which side to come down on in cases like that.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

It's still a rotten thing that she did. However, birds of a feather...

All I know up to this point, it seems this lady is rotten to the core. The money she earned with her job might have gotten her out of the gutter, but it didn´t got the gutter out of her.

Also, the Golden State Warriors had a plan in place to wait for the jump ball in their playoff game with the Clippers, then walk off the floor and refuse to play. They had scheduled another private players meeting to talk with the Clippers players before the game to get them to do the same, which they likely would have.

It´s looking all so bizarr. There is more behind it. I mean when was the last time millionaires striked (respectively wanted to) for their poor fellows? Up today they were selfish a$$holes, that didn´t give a phuck about the rest. It seems this thing is set-up to get rid of a owner. What really happened?

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Arguments over whether or not he should lose his ownership because of something he said in a private conversation reveal a great deal about how we feel about racism, the rich vs. poor gap, right to privacy, free speech, and a host of other issues.

Debates in your (and my) country are allowed as far it helps certain powerful groups. Let me give you an example: The last time the rich/poor gap seriously was tried to be attacked, it got clobbered away by NYC police men in the Wall street. Racism debates out of the blue just distract from real problems. The people just get used... yet again. It becomes more and more obvious that the "racism argument" is used to get rid of an unpleasant person in this very case.

American laws and mores are not made in a vacuum. They're formed in response to public debates like these.

Which are directed and initiated by powerful groups. I make a wild guess here (I might be wrong, but one can´t be cautious enough nowadays): Those groups try to nail another coffin into the freedom of speech. Inch by inch step by step heading into police state. If your government had done it all at once after 9/11 (the surpressing of basic freedom rights) you would have gotten a revolution.... Smart strategy to do it slowly.

And the laws and the mores that ultimately result are a major reason why America, despite its economic stranglehold on much of the rest of the world, still maintains a certain level of respect and admiration abroad.

And that respect is shrinking in warp speed thanks to multis like Monsanto, imperialistic wars, the latest coupe in Ukraine, the NSA scandal, and what else.

Your man-crush Putin presides over a country where gays are routinely victimized. The vociferous debates that emerge in America whenever a minority group is perceived to be oppressed help to guarantee that that kind of situation isn't tolerated here.

To make the Putin thing clear: I know he is a basterd, and the USA is still better off, besides all the problems. I put him up as protest to the unseen before MSM reports since the start of the Ukraine putsch. I never realized how serious "forced into line" "our" press nowadays is. Literally it goes bad russians, good americans. It´s deeply concerning. More about the whole issue from circa page 1360 in the world politics thread...

Yet you don’t apply the same logic to Sterling.

I absolutely do! Please don´t act like redflanders, trying to twist my words. Existing law does have allowance to step in if serious crime is planned (even if happening in privacy). The lines are strict to some degree (even though they were soften more and more over the years).
Making private racial slurs are no crime (yet), as it´s not (yet) a crime to speak against the homosexualisation of the society. But if we go on with the speed of things, one day the Gendermainstream-and Feminazis will try to force us to believe in the goods of kidsexualisation. The Green party tried it once. It sounds absurd, but it will happen if these owners of the final truth are not stopped.

I’ll grant you there was a recent high profile case in Silicon Valley where a CEO of a tech company was forced to resign because of his views on this issue.

Sad, but no surprise (see my last paragraph). As I said yesterday, the normal becomes abnormal, the good are the bad nowadays, and so on.
What evolution did and thought us is all wrong. Good job ACLU and friends. I wait for the day the men get cut their penis and implemented a vagina, then we all can be happy lesbians with adopted kids from aliens. It became all so absurd in the decling western civilisation. I just can shake my head in disbelief.

Sometimes we have to choose, Foxxy. Sometimes the choice is between the rights of a minority to have the same opportunities and benefits that everyone else has vs. those who think those opportunities and benefits should be restricted. I don’t find it hard to decide which side to come down on in cases like that.

Free minds like me have nothing against minorities. We are tolerant. But they have to be stopped if they wanna implement their final truth into everybody (the outcome: see last paragraph). Those are the intolerants.
Don´t believe the hype...

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

First, here's a good article on the NBA constitution and what rules apply in this case. This is the crux of how this should be debated (and it will be). So everyone can read what it says, and determine if these rules are enough to toss Sterling.

As an aside, a committee of owners voted 10-0 to recommend forcing Sterling to sell. This now goes to some sort of conference meeting where paperwork will be drawn, and a final vote amongst the entire league will vote. Could take less than a week, could take longer.

Meanwhile, the NBA isn't only good for scandal, Damien Lillard, a young superstar with the Portland Trailblazers made a Michael Jorden-esque shot to upend the Houston Rockets. Link here.

 

[Merckx index]

Debates in your (and my) country are allowed as far it helps certain powerful groups. Let me give you an example: The last time the rich/poor gap seriously was tried to be attacked, it got clobbered away by NYC police men in the Wall street. Racism debates out of the blue just distract from real problems. The people just get used... yet again. It becomes more and more obvious that the "racism argument" is used to get rid of an unpleasant person in this very case.

Which are directed and initiated by powerful groups. I make a wild guess here (I might be wrong, but one can´t be cautious enough nowadays): Those groups try to nail another coffin into the freedom of speech. Inch by inch step by step heading into police state. If your government had done it all at once after 9/11 (the surpressing of basic freedom rights) you would have gotten a revolution.... Smart strategy to do it slowly.

And that respect is shrinking in warp speed thanks to multis like Monsanto, imperialistic wars, the latest coupe in Ukraine, the NSA scandal, and what else.

Hello! Donald Sterling is one of the oligarchs, right? He’s not just a member of the 1%, he’s a member of the 0.001%. Are you saying that the other oligarchs sacrificed one of their own just to pound another nail into the coffin of free speech? If so, why did they act only now, when they had plenty of evidence to act on years ago? And wouldn’t it have been much more to their advantage to sacrifice someone who wasn’t one of their own, such as these racist players you referred to? Why was it that one of the wealthiest men in America got taken down?

You keep talking about how the police state is taking over, but here we have a very clear cut case of the masses forcing a decision on the wealthy few. The NBA owners didn’t want to kick Sterling out, at least not enough to go through the hassle it involved, but when large numbers of ordinary citizens began screaming that he had to go, they were forced to act. If this isn’t a textbook example of the power of the masses, I don’t know what is. Regardless of whether you agree with what happened or not, I don’t see how you can seriously say this action wasn’t initiated by the many against the few.

But rather than see it this way, you say the masses were manipulated. Really? By who? I just pointed out that the owners didn’t want to touch this situation. Did the media manipulate the masses? Well, in the first place, in the internet age, the media are not distinct from the masses. Much of the news now is in fact comments of anonymous individuals. In the second place, much of the media are against this. There have been a large number of columnists speaking out against what happened to Sterling, in fact echoing views very similar to your own. So how can you say this is a result of media manipulation?

Having been leftist for most of my life, I know very well how we tend to think. We think that people who don’t agree with our views are manipulated by the state, by the large corporations, by the wealthy oligarchs, and other bete noire du jour, while we ourselves think freely, independent of manipulation. But as a scientist, I know it isn’t really that simple. Everyone’s beliefs are the product of numerous influences. None of us is free from manipulation. Of course I believe that some views are more informed than others, but I think it’s dangerous to dismiss everyone who disagrees with me as being manipulated in a way that I’m not.

I absolutely do! Please don´t act like redflanders, trying to twist my words. Existing law does have allowance to step in if serious crime is planned (even if happening in privacy). The lines are strict to some degree (even though they were soften more and more over the years).

I didn’t twist your words. You agreed with me that certain kinds of views, such as pedophilia, are grounds for barring people from certain kinds of jobs. Even if there is no evidence that a crime is planned. But you don’t apply the same logic to Sterling’s racism, which ought to bar him from owning a franchise in a business that has serious laws against discrimination.

I can understand why you make a distinction, but the distinction is not, as you seem to believe, one of a crime vs. just free speech. In both cases, there is no crime involved, it’s purely a matter of speech. But in one case, pedophilia, you accept that the speech by itself is sufficient grounds for barring someone from a certain profession, whereas in the other case, racism, you don’t. That is a legitimate position, even if I don’t happen to agree with it, but it’s very different from saying that this is purely a matter of free speech. It isn’t.

If it were, then some individual could broadcast his view that there is nothing wrong with pedophilia (which, by the way, is accepted in some cultures), and still have no trouble getting a job at a day care center. He can’t, not because he has committed a crime, and not even because he might commit a crime, but because parents don’t want someone who even thinks that way alone with their kids. Freedom of speech means we don’t arrest people for expressing certain views, but it doesn’t mean that we can’t use those views to judge whether they are qualified for certain kinds of jobs. There isn’t and never has been freedom to work at any job you want. You have to be qualified, and sometimes your views on certain issues are very relevant to whether you’re qualified.

That is basically the logic being applied to Sterling. People who support his ban are saying that being racist disqualifies him from owning an NBA franchise. There are plenty of other jobs he can have, including real estate and the law, from which no one is suggesting he be banned. And the people who object to what has happened to Sterling are not upset because they think that views expressed in private should have no relevance to whether he keeps his job. They’re upset because they think that racist views are not serious enough to disqualify him.

Again, while I don’t agree with that, I accept that as a legitimate position. One valid argument supporting that view is that there are plenty of examples of racism among players, who have generally not lost their jobs for it. So, yes, you can argue that there is some hypocrisy, some double standards, here. But again, an owner has far more power than a player, the power to hire, oversee and fire hundreds of other people, and it can be argued that racism at this level is far more destructive.

Making private racial slurs are no crime (yet), as it´s not (yet) a crime to speak against the homosexualisation of the society. But if we go on with the speed of things, one day the Gendermainstream-and Feminazis will try to force us to believe in the goods of kidsexualisation. The Green party tried it once. It sounds absurd, but it will happen if these owners of the final truth are not stopped.

Arguments like the one we are having, which are being repeated literally thousands of times all over the internet, are one very good reason for doubting that it will ever come to this. I won’t start to worry until attempts are made to identify and prosecute people for opinions expressed on the internet. That does happen occasionally. I remember a few years ago, someone who disagreed strongly with conservative pundit Michelle Malkin called her some very bad names on the internet, and ended up losing his job. But I believe his job was associated with some clause about respectful behavior towards others; and of course, they guy was not subject to any legal prosecution.

Sad, but no surprise (see my last paragraph). As I said yesterday, the normal becomes abnormal, the good are the bad nowadays, and so on.
What evolution did and thought us is all wrong. Good job ACLU and friends. I wait for the day the men get cut their penis and implemented a vagina, then we all can be happy lesbians with adopted kids from aliens. It became all so absurd in the decling western civilisation. I just can shake my head in disbelief.

Come on, Foxxy, be serious.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

He got it, in one sentence, without beating around the bush Merckx :

"But all of us need to worry about privacy"

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...donald-sterling-private-conversation/8693323/

"TMZ, the gossip website, refuses to say whether it traded money to air the tape (ironically, it sees that as private information)"
Applied double standards at its best.

This writer Mitch Albom wrote a great article. When was the last time I hailed a MSM US journo? I think a long time ago. So long ago I can´t remember...

 

[Merckx index]

I’ll say it one more time. Sterling is not being pushed out just because he made those comments. As another writer noted recently, if another owner had made those comments, it’s very unlikely he would have been told to sell his team. In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me at all to learn that another owner has said something like that, or something else equally outrageous.

Sterling is being pushed out because he has a record of breaking the anti-discrimination laws. These comments were the last straw. They were not the justification for getting rid of him, they were a reminder of his behavior over the years, which has been illegal and which is a justification for getting rid of him.

Yes, he should have been pushed out a long time ago. Yes, the NBA owners are only doing it now because they feel economically threatened, and because they have public opinion on their side. Yes, the NBA’s stance on this issue is somewhat hypocritical. Yes, most of the public that thinks Sterling should go is basing their views only on these statements, and may not even be aware of what he did in the past.

None of which changes the simple fact that it’s Sterling’s breaking of the law in the past that is the deciding factor here.

Suppose Michael Vick, in a private conversation that was secretly recorded and made public, said that he never had any compassion for animals, and that it didn’t bother him at all to watch them suffer. Would you object if, on the basis of those comments, a movement was made to ban him from the NFL? Not because those comments suggest he feels cruelty to animals, which is his free right to express, but because they reveal that he is still the same law-breaker he was before.

If any other NFL player made private comments like that, he could weather the storm. He might get a great deal of hate from many people, and no doubt an animals rights group would call for him to lose his job. But he wouldn't lose his job, not simply for making those comments. But Michael Vick would, because of his past history. That's the difference.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Merckx we won´t get to the same page in this case. I would agree with the most you say, but the major problem stands tall in the pocket: He got in trouble because of illegally obtained private conversations. It´s so bad since it touches one of the most important rights in a democracy.
The hypocrites had their chances to bring down Sterling, plenty of them, and nothing happened.
And what´s worse, nobody cares (except a few like Albom).

 

[ChrisE]

Interesting.

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/bruce-levenson-atlanta-hawks-email-team-sale/

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

It is interesting. I think what's most interesting is that the topic is now so radioactive because of Sterling and that debacle, that 90% of the questions Levenson asked in the e-mail (read it here) are valid. But because he made some assumptions in that e-mail that can't be validated, and the e-mail is being released at the worst possible time, he's done. To me, he at worst looks out of touch on some race issues, but while honestly trying to figure out how to get in touch, in order to help the entire Atlanta Hawks organization.

I have to agree with Kareem on this. He makes some vary sage comments in this well-written article for Time magazine.

Businesspeople should have the right to wonder how to appeal to diverse groups in order to increase business. They should even be able to make minor insensitive gaffes if there is no obvious animosity or racist intent. This is a business email that is pretty harmless in terms of insulting anyone — and pretty fascinating in terms of seeing how the business of running a team really works.

The thing that makes me mad is that Levenson was too quick to rend his clothing and shout mea culpa. In his apology, he wrote, “By focusing on race, I also sent the unintentional and hurtful message that our white fans are more valuable than our black fans.” But that’s not the message in the email at all. If the seats had been filled, even if by all blacks, the email wouldn’t have been written. He wasn’t valuing white fans over blacks; he was trying to figure out a way to change what he thought was the white perception in Atlanta so he could sell more tickets. That’s his job.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

Well, it has been said that I am no longer an NBA fan. I should know. I said that in the NFL thread. But that does not mean I am paying no attention all of the time. I can be jolted out of a slumber.

It is cool the Golden State Warriors will make the 2015 NBA finals for the first time in eons. Likewise for Cleveland. Even with LaBron James, Cleveland is much more interesting than last year's Miami Heat. The Cavs just have far more youth and energy than the Heat did in 2014. The Warriors have youth and the best 3-point shooter on the map this year (Curry).

What woke me up though was this article titled "Get ready for the worst NBA Finals matchup ever, if you're into NBA history": http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba...hup-ever-if-youre-into-nba-history/ar-BBkmilm. Here, Sean Deveney of the Sporting News says this will be the worst matchup in history based on, well, the COMBINED (sum of both team's) winning percentage of both 2015 NBA finalists over their entire recorded history of 0.926. RLY? Using THAT to claim this will be the worst ever NBA finals matchup?

How about the fact that you have an offensive power (like him or not) like LaBron James for the Cavs, and then the Warriors have essentially what should have been the 2015 defensive player of the year in Draymond Green. Ok, Green was second to Kawhi Leonard in DPOY balloting. But Green had more 1st place votes. Here is a summary of the balloting for the 2015 DPOY:
- Leonard: 37 (1st place votes), 41 (2nd's), 25 (3rd's)
- Green: 45 (1st place votes), 25 (2nd's), 17 (3rd's)
If you want to check for typo errors, here is the link to an article by SB*Nation's Jesus Gomez on April 23 2015:
http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2015/4/23/8480079/kawhi-leonard-wins-defensive-player-of-the-year.
Then add the fact that Green is a really smart player and will likely get the responsibility to guard LaBron. The matchup we all want to see: one of the NBA's best offensive players vs. one of the league's best defensive players. Both teams have youth, energy, can score off defensive plays keeping game tempo high and not just a boring half-court game like the Heat vs. Spurs of last year. Worst matchup in NBA history? Is he (Deveney) kidding? This is a matchup worth watching.

The NBA should have hired me as their marketing manager.

 

[jmdirt]

Cavs in 6

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

GSW in 7.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Good post On3m@. Sports writers, like the NBA, do better when large market teams make the finals. I'm sure many of them can't wait until the Lakers and Celtics go at it again, while the rest of the nation welcomes both G'S and Cle.

I think the real story in these finals are the best player in the league, and one of the best ever (LeBron) versus the best team in the league (GS). Yes, Curry won the MVP and rightfully so, and I think people will see why in this series. But when it comes down to the serious crunch time on the biggest stage, that still (usually!) shows LeBron above everyone else. While the Cavs are already young overall, I can only wonder what they would be like now with a healthy Andrew Wiggens, instead of a gimpy (and out) Kevin Love.

Still, the Warriors were the best team all season, and through the playoffs, while the Cavs had a fairly soft schedule in the East. I like GS overall here, but it very well could go 7 games.

 

[Berzin]

The Cleveland Cavaliers made a huge mistake with Kevin Love. Forget about the stats and analytics-the guy just looks like he doesn't want to be there. He doesn't even sit on the bench to watch any of the games now that he's out of the playoffs due to injury.

They now face a situation where Love can walk out the door for nothing, and they lose a valuable first-round pick who just so happened to have been rookie of the year this year, a young player they could have developed. Andrew Wiggins would have been a better addition to the team than the aging veterans who sit on the bench and make minimal contributions, and will more than likely not even be in the league next year. I'm talking about Shawn Marion, James Jones, Brendan Haywood, Kendrick Perkins, and Mike Miller. Al of these guys are a waste of roster space in comparison to what Wiggins could have given them, especially since they struggle to score if Kyrie is hurting and when (not if) J.R. Smith's jumper inevitably goes flat.

As or Lebron James, one-man teams don't win championships, and with his outside shooting so miserable during these playoffs it's going to be a struggle regardless of how good he is by himself. Yes, defense wins championships, but ya gotta be able to score.

The Cavaliers have a pretty easy run into the Finals given that the East has been so weak. They are going to run into a brick wall here with Golden State, who have proven they can be efficient on both offense and defense without David Lee, who isn't going to be back for them next year. I call that addition by subtraction.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Good post. Recall, it was basically Lebron acting like GM that pushed the Cavs to grab Love. He wanted that deal. Even when others were scratching their heads, the talk was that Lebron knew what he was doing, and the Cavs so happy to have him back, they followed suit.

 

[Berzin]

Lebron DID act as GM for the Cavaliers, which is the reason why Cleveland bought all those retreads from Miami to fill the bench.

As for Kevin Love, everyone was enamored with the numbers he was putting up in Minnesota, but it seems to have fool's gold.

After watching him all year, I think he's just one of those guys who puts up big numbers on a mediocre or bad team, where he can do what he wants. He could not incorporate his skill set into the Cleveland offense, and maybe that's the fault of the coach. You have to utilize the player's best abilities to fit the offense.

They'll have to do that to get the best out of him if he returns, which I highly doubt. We'll see.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Anyone watching the finals? Supposedly very high ratings, which doesn't surprise me.

What does surprise me is Golden State's inability to run or move the ball worth a darn. With Lebron playing pedal to the metal for 45+ minutes every night, and the Cavs barely getting 8 guys on the court, you'd think the Warriors would do more pick and roll, or even pass the ball more, to roll over them. Everything tells me they have all it takes to still win this. They could even run the table on the rest of the games. The other part of me says that Lebron is willing his entire team and controlling the entire game in historic fashion, and no matter what the Warriors do, Lebron will find a way to win anyway.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

I'm watching and actually enjoying this finals. I agree with everything you said there.

I would only add that despite what the reporters said (like the Cavs did not have a chance when Kyrie Irving went down with the busted knee cap), the Cavs have shown that this is the playoffs, what happens in regular season does not matter, and when you have support players step up in the absence of an injured player, well, anything can happen. I recall how ex-Suns Charles Barkley responded to reporters when asked about a game they lost during the regular season... "It's a March game", meaning the playoff run is an entirely different thing.

Now the reporters are saying the Warriors are done. How fickle those reporters are! This series could be over, yes, but that does not mean it is over. The Warriors can still win the finals. But to do it they are going to have to match the will of not just LeBron, but the entire Cavs players who are stepping it up.

 

[red_flanders]

Things seem to have turned.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

Turned indeed. And a strange turn. First, the Warriors game plan with smaller lineup seemed to work wonders. This would play into their athleticism and bench strength. They stepped up big time. Secondly, the Cavs stepped back, or down. Get this... the world's best player takes only two shots in the fourth quarter and scores zero points. Wat??? Can someone explain that? Then, LeBron has shown himself to be mentally strong in the past. But last night he was mentally weak. And the head injury as he fell out of bounds headfirst into a camera, that looked like a flop gone bad (that a pretty close quote of a Warrior player).

Anyways, series tied at 2-2 is much more interesting than 3-1. And THAT kind of makes me wonder if the Cavs threw the game. Think about it. Cavs play strangely. NBA... $$$. Maybe the NBA is like the WWF. I dunno. But it is still anyone's championship to win.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I seriously doubt they threw it under NBA guidance. I also doubt they had a game plan of "giving up" if so, the coaching and player substitutions would have been different. I think they were just worn out, especially Lebron. Also, if any team could have come back from 3-1, it would have been GS in this series. They had not played up to their level (and still haven't, especially Curry, even after the nice win yesterday), while the Cavs have been running on fumes. Let's just pretend that Cleveland eeks out a win yesterday and are up 3-1. Now, they go back to GS, where the final three games have a lot of travel, and benefit GS in almost every aspect.

Real uphill battle now for Cleveland. They need a lot of things to go their way. A lot.

 

[Berzin]

One thing Cleveland will not be able to change is their talent level. J.R. Smith is averaging 9 points on 30-something per cent shooting. Dellavadova is who he is, an offensive liability who the Warriors may have figured out on defense. Shumpert is basically playing with one arm.

I just don't see this happening, but it depends on how badly Golden State continues to play. Harrison Barnes has been shooting the ball like it's the first time he's seen one, and Draymond Green is getting horsed on the defensive glass.

It's going to take more than 3-point shooting from their pretty-boy backcourt for Golden State to win this thing. Cleveland at least knows how to win ugly, which is what may decide this series.

 

[red_flanders]

Warriors looking good to close, IMO. Look for a clear win in Cleveland. They just have too much for LeBron et. al.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Congratulations to the Golden State Warriors! You have to go back to the days of Rick Barry and his underhanded shot, so it's great to see a win for such a well run franchise today, and a great coach to boot. Plus another feather in the cap of Jerry West, working a little magic behind the scenes in the bay area.

Both of these teams look like they may have some staying power, and we could see both in the finals next year again. Cleveland just ran out of gas, and it makes one wonder if they had Irving and Wiggins...oops, I mean Kevin Love, how much closer it would have been.

Speaking of Jerry West and that trade. Did fans know that GS almost gave up Thompson to get Love, but West was adamant they do not?

http://tinyurl.com/nhkjzzb

Anyway, they didn't, and the Warriors are champions, again.