I can sympathize with Cleveland’s desire to play “what if” with the NBA Finals. The Cavs were missing two of their best players and LeBron James gave the Warriors all they could handle on his own. But Cleveland’s game of “what if” overlooks the Warriors’ counters to all their hypotheticals. What if Kyrie Irving didn’t get injured? Well, what if the Warriors packed the lane and denied him looks at the rim? What if Kevin Love was healthy? Well, what if the Warriors exposed his defensive weakness by going small and driving straight at him? What if LeBron James had help? Well, what if the Warriors’ team defense was flexible and fast enough to shut down that help while still locking down James? On Christmas day, theWarriors team not only dispatched the Cavs — for the fourth time in a row — but put to rest all the “what ifs” but one. What if the Warriors were the better team last season, and would have won the Finals even againsta healthy Cleveland squad?
The Warriors met the Cavs’ physical defense with their own hard-nosed play. And the Warriors had more success than the Cavs when it came to disrupting offensive flow. The Cavs shot31.6% from the field, and the carnage was spread equally across their line-up. When Cleveland tried to get Irving going through penetration, the Warriors shaded off the Cavs’ non-offensive players (Mozgov, Thompson, sometimes even Shumpert) and clogged the lane. Irving never found any rhythm, and he was reduced to low percentage outside shots (finishing the night 4-15 from the field; 0-6 from three). The Cavs’ efforts at getting Love going were even less successful. The Warriors’ resilient help defense denied Love open mid-range looks. As soon as he got the ball, he typically was facing not only his defender, but another Warrior harassing him from the perimeter. He was reduced to highly contested shots in the lane or three pointers — and shot poorly from both (5-16 from the field; 0-5 from three). But the Warriors’ real exploitation of Love came at the other end. Luke Walton closed the game with a modified version of the death line-up — Curry, Thompson, a terrific Shaun Livingston, Iguodala and Green. David Blatt countered by pulling his center, leaving nothing but Love’s pantomime defense between the Warriors’ and the basket. Curry sealed the game with a series of beautiful crunch-time lay-ups over Love. The player that the Cavs supposedly missed so desperately during last year’s Finals arguably was the key to the Warriors’ game-ending run.
As the Warriors exposed the limitations of Cleveland’s supporting cast, James once again tried to shoulder the entire load himself. There was a brief moment in the fourth quarter, following back-to-back slashes to the rim, when it looked as if James might be able to dragthe lifeless remainder of the Cavs’ roster to victory. But as in the Finals, LeBron’s devolution to hero ball played into the Warriors’ plans. He spent much of the night pounding the ball in isolation to diminishing returns (10-26 from the field; 4 turnovers). The brief flash James showed in the fourth quarter was the exception, not the rule. He was 0-3 from the field after those two dunks, went 1-4 from the line and was reduced to a spectator as Curry blew past his team’s entire defense for the Warriors’ final field goals. Whether from fatigue, frustration or general disengagement from his team, James looked like he was out of answers. The Warriors made James look human — Rush’s poke-away steal, Iguodala’s strip on alay-up, Green’s masterful block that was so perfectly timed that the refs (wrongly) assumed it must have been a foul — and being a mere mortal doesn’t seem to sit well with the King. James was gracious in defeat — personallycongratulating all the Warriors after the final buzzer — but he’s clearly frustrated. If the road to an NBA championship goes through Oakland, the Cavs still don’t have a map to victory.
While doubt loomed over the Cavs in defeat, confidence surged through the Warriors in victory. Neither Curry nor Thompson had great nights (6-15 and 6-16 respectively), but they fought through the Cavs’ bruising defense to deliver big baskets when needed. And even without Harrison Barnes and Leandro Barbosa — both of whom had some big moments against the Cavs in the Finals — the Warriors found enough offense to get the team through the stretches when Curry and Thompson were on the bench or ineffective. The stretch at the beginning of the fourth quarter proved particularly scary, as the Cavs came within 3 points of the lead. But Livingston hit the Warriors’ first three baskets of the quarter to protect their margin, capping a near-perfect night from the field (8-9). He looked utterly calm stepping up and delivering when the Warriors needed someone to be assertive. Still, in the end, this was Draymond’s game. On offense (22 points, 8-17 from the field, 2-3 from three, 7 assists), on defense (14 defensive rebounds, 2 blocks, countless shots made more difficult), and on chest-pounding swagger, there was no better player on the court. There have been so many joys in watching the emergence of the Warriors as a historically dominantteam, but the development of Green’s multidimensional, unabashed greatness is at the very top of the list.
Last summer, Green was asked aboutall the “what ifs” surrounding the Warriors’ title. He responded, with a certain lyrical flare, “If ifs were fifths, we’d all be drunk right now.” On a night whenGreen blew past or snuffed out so many of the “what ifs” hanging over the Warriors’ championship, he again provided a perfect summation of the Warriors’ mood. With 8 seconds left in the game, the camera focused on Green standing at the foulline, getting ready for his second free throw. He caught the ball and stared intently at the basket — then broke into a broad, unrestrainedsmile and hit the shot.
The post The End of “What If” (Warriors 89, Cavs 83) appeared first on Fast Break.