The Warriors are showing us the new NBA, and the Celtics better be taking notes

[D Dub]

"New NBA" = best shooter ever and another who is possibly top 10. 

Yeah, ok... We'll get right on it.

"New NBA" = "Old NBA".  Superstars gonna Superstar.  Same as it ever was.

Acquire or develop a superstar. Put a couple star talents beside him. Assemble and cultivate a deep and versatile supporting cast. Figure out how to best deploy the pieces to create a whole equal to or greater than the sum of the parts.

That's the recipe.

I think both the Cavs and Warriors have done this, but the main difference is the order in which each step is executed.

You just described Cleveland (as well as OKC), where they sought first talent then tried to figure out how they'd play together. 

Contrast that with GSW, who understood how they wanted to play and made moves to compliment and build upon what they were trying to do.  Namely, the Iguodala deal, drafting Klay, as well as signing Livingston (another switch everything guard). 

The later lends itself to having greater confidence as a group, in my opinion, because you don't have these identity crisis & coaching changes along the way.  Even the greatest players can succumb to doubt, just ask LBJ...

[PhoSita]

I think the problem for the Cavs is they've acquired players based on what their superstar thought would work best for him.

It doesn't seem to me that they have a good top down view of how they want to get the most out of their roster.  It's been more about playing politics to keep LeBron happy than having the right pieces around LeBron as he gets older.

Of course, it's on management to work with the star player(s) to instill a trust that management and the coaching staff have a vision and know how to implement that vision.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

I think the problem for the Cavs is they've acquired players based on what their superstar thought would work best for him.

It doesn't seem to me that they have a good top down view of how they want to get the most out of their roster.  It's been more about playing politics to keep LeBron happy than having the right pieces around LeBron as he gets older.

Of course, it's on management to work with the star player(s) to instill a trust that management and the coaching staff have a vision and know how to implement that vision.

Kinda funny that some of the game's all-time best players (Jordan, LeBron, Kobe) know hardly a thing about building a team that functions well.

[Vox_Populi]

I think if Golden State never became this good, Cleveland might have a title by now. I understand that's a useless hypothetical, but in general, Cleveland's team construction is fine. You can hide Irving and Love's defensive deficiencies against most teams, just not the Warriors. I'd say not even San Antonio can abuse those two like Golden State can.

[wiley]

I think if Golden State never became this good, Cleveland might have a title by now. I understand that's a useless hypothetical, but in general, Cleveland's team construction is fine. You can hide Irving and Love's defensive deficiencies against most teams, just not the Warriors. I'd say not even San Antonio can abuse those two like Golden State can.

Yes it's a mistake to just call this a Cleveland failure.  They tried to do the right thing.  There were only so many free agents available.  One team has to lose.  So far what we have is big time Warrior greatness.  So great that the big star barely has to play...that's amazing and historically interesting too.  When Curry went out for a couple weeks I started wondering if they could take Cleveland without him.  (I thought probably not but posted that if they could, they might become the automatic all time greatest team, by default.  What team has ever one the finals without its best player?  Without a league MVP?  We'll never know about that though. Glad Curry is healthy.

BTW When I think of best ever I always defer to Jordan Pippen tandem.  They'd just play the whole game almost and they'd take out this Warrior team.  Another case of we'll never know..

[PhoSita]

I think the problem for the Cavs is they've acquired players based on what their superstar thought would work best for him.

It doesn't seem to me that they have a good top down view of how they want to get the most out of their roster.  It's been more about playing politics to keep LeBron happy than having the right pieces around LeBron as he gets older.

Of course, it's on management to work with the star player(s) to instill a trust that management and the coaching staff have a vision and know how to implement that vision.

Kinda funny that some of the game's all-time best players (Jordan, LeBron, Kobe) know hardly a thing about building a team that functions well.

It's funny, but also not that surprising.

Those guys have never really had to compromise their own playing style for the sake of the bigger picture, right?

I mean, Kobe really should have, but refused to ever do that, to his own detriment.

It's why I think superstar players often don't make very good coaches or GMs.  There are exceptions (Bird, for example), but it seems like role players often have the best top-down view of these things.  Which makes sense, because those guys had to be able to see how their own limited skillset fit within the greater whole in order to be successful in their careers.

[Ed Hollison]

I think it’s too easy to just say the Warriors have Curry, Thompson, and Green and voila, that’s why they’re good. It’s not that easy.

First of all, Curry and Thompson haven’t been major contributors to their first two wins. It’s the team that’s won those games, not them, and that should tell you something.

So I suppose you could then say, “Well they’ve got tons of talent on the bench”. They do, but what kind of talent? They’ve invested money in guys like Iguodala and Livingston, both bigger guys for their respective positions who can handle the ball, shoot, pass, rebound, and defend multiple positions. Meanwhile, the Cavs traded two first-round picks for Timofey Mozgov.

The other thing to note is that if winning in the NBA these days were as easy as “just get three really great players” then the Cavaliers should be a lot better than they look right now. They’ve got one of the best players ever in his prime (Lebron) plus two guys who were considered top-10 or top-20 players in the league until just recently (Irving and Love).

You could say, for instance, “Well, Draymond Green is better than Kevin Love.” Yes he is, and you know why? Because he’s way better suited for the way the game is played now. He does all the things that Love does, plus he does the things that power forwards have never been asked to do until now: defend little guys in space, dribble/playmaking, etc.  Guess what? Klay Thompson isn’t just an elite shooter either. He’s also a great defender who, for instance, can switch onto a guy as big and strong as Kevin Love and hold his own.

This is the whole point: Don’t just accumulate talent (eg. pair Kevin Love with Rondo). Get the right talent.

This “new NBA” thing is more than just GSW related. The whole league is moving this way, and it started well before the Warriors got good. It’s just that the Warriors now do it better than anyone else.

[Fafnir]

How are Curry/Thompson not  major contributors? The way they contort the Cavs defense is the beginning of the Warriors attack, online after game 1 they had a ton of highlights showing 3 players jumping at those two and then an easy dunk. Scoring 30 isn't the only way to dominate the game.

I agree that the style of ball they play is important to consider as more shooting from 3 especially is how the NBA is best played now.

[SHAQATTACK]

I think the problem for the Cavs is they've acquired players based on what their superstar thought would work best for him.

It doesn't seem to me that they have a good top down view of how they want to get the most out of their roster.  It's been more about playing politics to keep LeBron happy than having the right pieces around LeBron as he gets older.

p

This is it in a nutshell.   Bron just thought talent is talent .....it's not key to playing together .   Riley was the mastermind behind the Heat big three.  Not LeBum.

LeBum fancies himself more wonderful as a GM and coach than he really is.   This is his Waterloo.

LeBron is no Larry Bird , Riley , Jackson , or Ainge when it comes to understanding who to put together . 

LeBron never considered his All Stars might have to have a mental strong makeup.  Neither Love , Irving , or any of the key players are mentally tuff , all are divas , not wanting to play harmed nose defense .  Bron is known for laying down during a battle if things look bleak.

[LarBrd33]

"New NBA" = best shooter ever and another who is possibly top 10. 

Yeah, ok... We'll get right on it.

"New NBA" = "Old NBA".  Superstars gonna Superstar.  Same as it ever was.

Acquire or develop a superstar. Put a couple star talents beside him. Assemble and cultivate a deep and versatile supporting cast. Figure out how to best deploy the pieces to create a whole equal to or greater than the sum of the parts.

That's the recipe.

Right. That's always been the recipe and will always be the recipe. It's not a coincidence that the final three teams this year all had superstars on them paired with other all stars.   

[PaulP34]

Well considering the Celtics played them the best this year I think Danny's been doing his homework

[PhoSita]

I think it’s too easy to just say the Warriors have Curry, Thompson, and Green and voila, that’s why they’re good. It’s not that easy.

First of all, Curry and Thompson haven’t been major contributors to their first two wins. It’s the team that’s won those games, not them, and that should tell you something.

As Fafnir points out above, the rest of the team doesn't get the chance to score the way they did in Games 1 and 2 if not for the attention that Klay and Curry demand on the floor.

The Brothers Splash are such good shooters that whether or not they are actually scoring, they have enormous gravity when they are on the floor.  That warps and bends the opposing defense in predictable ways, and the Warriors have a bevy of smart, skilled role players who have learned the best ways to exploit that warping and bending.

Yes, you need guys who can hit shots.  At times, Livingston, Barbosa, Iggy, Barnes, and Dray have all created points on their own, sometimes thanks to horrific defense from Kyrie and/or Love.

Still, the Warriors don't destroy the Cavs in Games 1 and 2 if the Cavs aren't falling over themselves to try and prevent Curry and Klay from doing what they did to the Thunder in Games 6 and 7 of the previous series.

[Timdawgg]

I think the problem for the Cavs is they've acquired players based on what their superstar thought would work best for him.

It doesn't seem to me that they have a good top down view of how they want to get the most out of their roster.  It's been more about playing politics to keep LeBron happy than having the right pieces around LeBron as he gets older.

Of course, it's on management to work with the star player(s) to instill a trust that management and the coaching staff have a vision and know how to implement that vision.

Kinda funny that some of the game's all-time best players (Jordan, LeBron, Kobe) know hardly a thing about building a team that functions well.

It's funny, but also not that surprising.

Those guys have never really had to compromise their own playing style for the sake of the bigger picture, right?

I mean, Kobe really should have, but refused to ever do that, to his own detriment.

It's why I think superstar players often don't make very good coaches or GMs.  There are exceptions (Bird, for example), but it seems like role players often have the best top-down view of these things.  Which makes sense, because those guys had to be able to see how their own limited skillset fit within the greater whole in order to be successful in their careers.

You nailed it Pho. Great post.

[Rondo9]

I think it’s too easy to just say the Warriors have Curry, Thompson, and Green and voila, that’s why they’re good. It’s not that easy.

First of all, Curry and Thompson haven’t been major contributors to their first two wins. It’s the team that’s won those games, not them, and that should tell you something.

As Fafnir points out above, the rest of the team doesn't get the chance to score the way they did in Games 1 and 2 if not for the attention that Klay and Curry demand on the floor.

The Brothers Splash are such good shooters that whether or not they are actually scoring, they have enormous gravity when they are on the floor.  That warps and bends the opposing defense in predictable ways, and the Warriors have a bevy of smart, skilled role players who have learned the best ways to exploit that warping and bending.

Yes, you need guys who can hit shots.  At times, Livingston, Barbosa, Iggy, Barnes, and Dray have all created points on their own, sometimes thanks to horrific defense from Kyrie and/or Love.

Still, the Warriors don't destroy the Cavs in Games 1 and 2 if the Cavs aren't falling over themselves to try and prevent Curry and Klay from doing what they did to the Thunder in Games 6 and 7 of the previous series.

The Warriors role players are more versatile the Cavs which is big reason they're winning

[wiley]

I think it’s too easy to just say the Warriors have Curry, Thompson, and Green and voila, that’s why they’re good. It’s not that easy.

First of all, Curry and Thompson haven’t been major contributors to their first two wins. It’s the team that’s won those games, not them, and that should tell you something.

As Fafnir points out above, the rest of the team doesn't get the chance to score the way they did in Games 1 and 2 if not for the attention that Klay and Curry demand on the floor.

The Brothers Splash are such good shooters that whether or not they are actually scoring, they have enormous gravity when they are on the floor.  That warps and bends the opposing defense in predictable ways, and the Warriors have a bevy of smart, skilled role players who have learned the best ways to exploit that warping and bending.

Yes, you need guys who can hit shots.  At times, Livingston, Barbosa, Iggy, Barnes, and Dray have all created points on their own, sometimes thanks to horrific defense from Kyrie and/or Love.

Still, the Warriors don't destroy the Cavs in Games 1 and 2 if the Cavs aren't falling over themselves to try and prevent Curry and Klay from doing what they did to the Thunder in Games 6 and 7 of the previous series.

The Warriors role players are more versatile the Cavs which is big reason they're winning

Yeah as Billups put it:  Warriors with 8 guys who can create and get their own shot, or make a good pass. Cavs with Lebron and Kyrie who can do that and the rest are specialists.  He may have exaggerated a touch with the numbers but it's close to that.