Because the Harden trade will go down in infamy as the worst in all of sports if they never win, shyt forget Championships if they never even reach the finals again.Why would a statement that is false hurt me?
Westbrook and Durant will always be in the contenders conversation if they stay together, can't say the same for that one trick pony, inefficient, bytch made, dolphin-toothed, flailing fakkit in Houston.
Yeah I think you need to take a vacation from TheColi. Come back when your head is straight.Trade away your closer for pennies on the dolllar brehs.
NBAsavant.com: Your Source For Advanced NBA Analytics
Is that the one they lost with ? I can't remember
Fasho dont remember but i know it was hilarious to me for some reason
How is it irrelevant when he plays the 4 whenever they go small, and can guard pretty much every position on switches? That's the whole point of why the go small - because they have versatile defenders that can guard big men and wings.
I mean they have arguably the greatest closing lineup in history with him playing a significant role (stretching the floor and defending multiple positions).
You don't just replace that type of versatility and ability. Especially not for the sacrifice of keeping a defensive big who can be replaced more easily.
It's only really Steph and Klay who take defensive attention away from him. His impact on offense can't be underestimated - a piece of the puzzle to maximize this team's ability in increasing/cutting into margins that otherwise wouldn't exist if they were to trade twos. I'm certainly not his biggest fan, but to act like he's more replaceable than Ezeli is absurd.
Look at all the shyt he's doing on the offense (21 points) and defensive ends -
Backing down smaller players in the posts, creating offense out of the post, switching on guards, hitting threes, driving to the rim, backdoor cuts.
i) Barnes can play in ANY lineup
ii) Are you forgetting they actually won a title with Barnes averaging 33 minutes in the Finals (32 mins in the playoffs) where he played the 4 and Draymond at the 5 in the second half of that series where they won three games in a row?
iii) They won a title and were effective all throughout the playoffs with Ezeli only playing 9 minutes (Bogut only averaged 23 minutes). Even with decreasing Bogut's minutes in this year's playoffs, they could easily find a big man replacement that can grab boards and protect the rim
iv) It isn't like Ezeli is some great post player or versatile defender - there are plenty of big men in the league that can provide the same amount of impact
You could have switched Barnes and Shump and the outcome would've been the same.
Will they be as dominant if they can't pull out that lineup? No, not quite, but they still can win with ease. Can they survive the 25 or so games Bogut misses every year without Ezeli? No. Mind you I'm talking more about the roster as presently constructed, not really speculating on who else is available and capable around the league as replacements.If you wanna throw some names out there go ahead.
The whole point in bringing up the Finals is that when they were down and needed to make an adjustment, Barnes' ability to play the 4 was instrumental in them gaining the upper hand. That lineup doesn't work without Barnes - just like every single lineup that they used in close games or where they needed to cut into margins. Barnes was an integral part in all of them; he and Draymond are basically the layers to the identity of this squad.What 4 was Barnes guarding in the Finals?
Tristan Thompson?
You gotta throw out anything from that Finals. The Cavs had one legit offensive threat for 5 of those games.
Here's the thing though - that small ball lineup is the most important in winning games against elite teams + late in games. I mean that can't be understated - the flux of all those lineups when it comes to building leads throughout games really doesn't indicate what kind of impact each particular lineup has, and against who. What we do know is, no matter what lineup they face and no what matter the situation, Barnes will always be used more often than Ezeli and he'll always have more impact.Don't get me wrong I know the Green, Iggy, Barnes, Klay, Steph lineup is their best, but they don't play it THAT much (about 6% of the time).
Of their 5 most used lineups 4 have a traditional big. The "killer" lineup is insane, +66 on the year (small sample size), but the lineup with Ezieli instead of Barnes is still +30! So is the lineup with Bogut and Rush instead of Iggy and Barnes. For all intensive purposes +30 is just as unbeatable as +66. Barnes is a luxury.
Common sense should tell you that Ezeli is far easier to replace than Barnes. Ezeli wasn't even a factor last season (when they won a title), yet he's suppose to be more vital than their fourth most important player?The sample size is important too, they're playing that small lineup about twice as often as they did last year, and while its deadly I doubt it holds up as a +66 for the year.
