But see that’s the thing, sure you could call it luck but it’s also been the general trend of the team. In clutch time stats, C’s were 29th in the league at 13-22 in clutch time situations. Even if you take into account the magical 2nd half turnaround, I think they were 7-8, which is better but still a little below League average.
In the playoffs, C’s are 7-5 (4 of those wins vs BKN) but with an offensive rating of 89 (drtg of 103). Translation: if they’re gonna win in the clutch, it’s likely because of their defense because 89 isn’t really getting it done.
The other translation, C’s are 7-3 when games haven’t been close. C’s can get it done in non-clutch time, buoyed by an overall net rating of +5 (highest of any team in the playoffs). C’s can be the most dominant team and can knock a team out early in the game, or have a comfortable enough cushion that it isn’t close. I think game 4 could’ve been this way too had our turnovers not kept GSW close. We were leading at the half by 5 but it could’ve been more had we not kept GSW around by gifting them points.
I’m not bashing the C’s. I’m just trying to call a spade, a spade. As we saw with the Nets team, as great as KD and Kyrie are, teams can’t just “turn it on”. Habits are formed in the regular season and at some point, we need to accept that teams are who they are. C’s aren’t great down the stretch in tight games. That’s how they’ve played all year, even in their magical 2nd half. And just because I say “they aren’t great down the stretch” doesn’t automatically translate to “C’s are d0oMeD and can NeV3r win in the clutch”. But C’s can blow teams out, including this Warriors team. And sure, C’s can still try to eke out a win in the clutch but like I said, in a tight game, it gets harder to pick them because they havent really thrived in those situations.