Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

NBA Finals Thread - Warriors/Cavs


Chaos

Recommended Posts

Let's get this thing started - I can't wait for this series!  A healthy Cavaliers team with the wanted rematch against the defending champs Golden State.  IMO, the Warriors looked vulnerable against the long, athletic Thunder who brought the defensive intensity to another level.  On the other hand, the Cavs have rolled through the playoffs except for two missteps in Toronto.

Who you got in this series?  How will the Cavs match up defensively against the splash brothers?  Will we see less of Bogut this time around?  Personally, I feel he is a huge liability for GSW whenever he is on the court, but things don't improve much when Festus checks in.  I hate the "hack-a-player" strategy, so hopefully the matchups will allow GS to play the small lineup of Curry, Thompson, Green, Barnes, and Iguodala more often, now that the threat of Adams and Ibaka is behind them.

My prediction: Warriors win the series in 5, losing only game 3 in Cleveland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll see. I think he'll be in the running. Although Iggy had a bigger impact on offense, from what I remember. He was the most consistent play on both sides of the ball from Game 1 onwards. Curry didn't heat up until later in the series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that is a bit of a hyperbolic statement but he's been streaky. The bar is high for him to perform every night and consistently. 

I have this sneak feeling that either him or Klay are going to get hot in the 4th.

Draymond has been the best, for me, so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...