Game 59 - Utah Jazz 94 - Toronto Raptors 104

[KeonClark]

Scola has a better game. The matchup suites him better.

You mean he's going to be watching from a luxury suite? That is a good spot for him to do better

[Chr1s1anL]

You mean he's going to be watching from a luxury suite? That is a good spot for him to do better

No, I mean he has a more productive game. Not quite how he started the year but, a good game. I think people forget how good he was to start out the season.

[Bandit]

No, I mean he has a more productive game. Not quite how he started the year but, a good game. I think people forget how good he was to start out the season.

Nope, I think most people want him to get off his old legs and let JT play so that he can play that way for the playoffs.

Cause right now he looks old and bad

So lets get him in that suite

[Chr1s1anL]

Nope, I think most people want him to get off his old legs and let JT play so that he can play that way for the playoffs.

Cause right now he looks old and bad

So lets get him in that suite

Agreed, I think he will sit from now on when we play a stretch 4

[DanH]

No, I mean he has a more productive game. Not quite how he started the year but, a good game. I think people forget how good he was to start out the season.

Yeah, he was great to start the season, that's why even in the first few games everyone on the team played better when he was on the bench...

He wasn't good, he was never good for any sustained stretch. He'd have his random 20 point outbursts but when he didn't he was a problem.

[Chr1s1anL]

Yeah, he was great to start the season, that's why even in the first few games everyone on the team played better when he was on the bench...

He wasn't good, he was never good for any sustained stretch. He'd have his random 20 point outbursts but when he didn't he was a problem.

Your wrong. He was good for us at the beginning of the year. +/- does not define good basketball. There's more to the game than stats.

[Barolt]

Yeah, he was great to start the season, that's why even in the first few games everyone on the team played better when he was on the bench...

He wasn't good, he was never good for any sustained stretch. He'd have his random 20 point outbursts but when he didn't he was a problem.

Just for fun, I pulled the stats. In November, when Scola was 'good' and Patterson was 'bad'...

We had a 103.0 Ortg, 103.8 Drtg, -0.8 net rating when Scola was on the floor. 104.1 Ortg, 97.1 Drtg, +7.0 net rating when he was on the bench.

We had a 104.6 Ortg, 98.8 Drtg, +5.7 net rating when Patterson was on the floor. 102.8 Ortg, 101.7 Drtg, +1.1 net rating when he was on the bench.

[tDotted]

It's simple keep them under 100 and we win. Raps are 31-3 when that happens. We've kept teams under 100 34 times. Which is 3rd behind San Antonio and Miami.

They've been kept under 100 a grand total of 4 times this whole season. Not that simple.

[KeonClark]

Your wrong. He was good for us at the beginning of the year. +/- does not define good basketball. There's more to the game than stats.

Groundhogs day folks! We're about to wind up another fascinating Christian the casey defender vs analytics guys argument! And heeeere we go....

[JWash]

You went back 30 years to find a 1 seed losing to a 2 seed in the conf finals. Lol sure anythings possible

Heatles in 2011. Sure they weren't god-tier 70+ wins like Golden State, but they had probably 2 of the top 5 players in the league and another top 5 one. And were looking absolutely dominant until they fell apart (and by they I mean LeBron) in the finals.

Another example is the Lakers super team in 2003-04. Payton-Kobe-George-Malone-Shaq, not the greatest regular season record because of age I think but they were extremely talented. Lost in the finals to Detroit because Kobe really wanted to win MVP over Shaq and wouldn't pass the basketball. (And Detroit was really good and underrated, they were heavy underdogs going in though).

Then there's 2007 67 win Dallas, completely getting overwhelmed in the 1st round by 8 seeded Golden State. They actually lost their first 4 games that year, so they basically played at a 70 win pace from game 5 on.

The NBA's not the NCAA or NHL where weird shit happens all the time in the playoffs, but it does happen sometimes. Who knows, maybe we take care of business in the first two rounds, exploit the Cavs with pick and roll and then the cold in Toronto (we need a snow day in June to happen lol) gives Curry a case of the shakes?

Don't even think Golden State is guaranteed to get the finals. Seems like it cause of how good they are, but anything can happen.

[Mess]

They've been kept under 100 a grand total of 4 times this whole season. Not that simple.

Utah averages 98 ppg....who are you talking about?

It's their D we have to be concerned about.


(I assumed Christian was talking about Utah)

[JWash]

It's simple keep them under 100 and we win. Raps are 31-3 when that happens. We've kept teams under 100 34 times. Which is 3rd behind San Antonio and Miami.

Did you just say it's "simple" to keep Golden State under 100?

Please tell me I'm reading the context wrongly and you're talking about Utah.

[Barolt]

Heatles in 2011. Sure they weren't god-tier 70+ wins like Golden State, but they had probably 2 of the top 5 players in the league and another top 5 one. And were looking absolutely dominant until they fell apart (and by they I mean LeBron) in the finals.

Another example is the Lakers super team in 2003-04. Payton-Kobe-George-Malone-Shaq, not the greatest regular season record because of age I think but they were extremely talented. Lost in the finals to Detroit because Kobe really wanted to win MVP over Shaq and wouldn't pass the basketball. (And Detroit was really good and underrated, they were heavy underdogs going in though).

Then there's 2007 67 win Dallas, completely getting overwhelmed in the 1st round by 8 seeded Golden State. They actually lost their first 4 games that year, so they basically played at a 70 win pace from game 5 on.

The NBA's not the NCAA or NHL where weird shit happens all the time in the playoffs, but it does happen sometimes. Who knows, maybe we take care of business in the first two rounds, exploit the Cavs with pick and roll and then the cold in Toronto (we need a snow day in June to happen lol) gives Curry a case of the shakes?

Don't even think Golden State is guaranteed to get the finals. Seems like it cause of how good they are, but anything can happen.

As good as Golden State is, that Western Conference is going to be a brutal grind. To get through the Finals they'll have to go through two of: Clippers, Spurs, Thunder. That's not easy.

[JWash]

As good as Golden State is, that Western Conference is going to be a brutal grind. To get through the Finals they'll have to go through two of: Clippers, Spurs, Thunder. That's not easy.

I don't have them in the finals personally. Idk why, no logic just a gut feeling but I think they're going to choke.

I'm taking the field.

[Chr1s1anL]

Did you just say it's "simple" to keep Golden State under 100?

Please tell me I'm reading the context wrongly and you're talking about Utah.

Doesn't the game thread say Utah?