[Western Conference Playoffs - 1st round] (1)Golden State vs. (8)New Orleans

Better hands (evidently in the steals), Better lateral quickness (doesn't get beaten as often 1 v 1). Curry's an above average defender and just a beast on offense. Wouldn't have a problem with him winning MVP even though I want Harden to win it.

 

Wasn't Eric Gordon the second or third best player the Pellies had, this round? You could make a case for Anderson being 2a or 2b.

Asik wasn't good because of the matchup. He showed that he still has stone hands (not that the Pellies need him to score tho) but they also didn't exactly need his post defense against Bogut. And David Lee didn't play a single minute (I think) either, so there's that.

If NO matched up with the Grizz or the Spurs, I think Asik would have been more comfortable. He looked lost against the Warriors.

In all fairness, Curry has a Bogut (arguably top 10 in defenders) or a Draymond Green (finished 3rd in DPoY?) to funnel his defenders into. Nash had...Stoudemire? Kurt Thomas? Not exactly defensive stalwarts.

Plus, D'Antoni's offense was predicated on "If the other team scores, we're going to inbound the ball and score in the next 7 seconds" anyway, so it's not like defense was a priority.

Not saying Nash is a good defender, but I don't think his defense was as garbage as everyone says it is. Not in D'Antoni's system, anyway.

 

Curry is far from an average defender. He benefits greatly from having a ridiculously good defensive team and individual players around him

 

I thought with better coaching & depth NOLA could have pushed it to 6. Still a great experience for them/AD.

They'll have quite a few holes to fill (big, backup big, backup guard) with little cap room ($10 MM I think) so it will be interesting to monitor their moves.

#18 for Asik looked like a steak during that series. Was pretty bad.

 

Yup

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Heartily agree with this excerpt from this blog <a href="http://t.co/L2LabkvMJK">http://t.co/L2LabkvMJK</a> <a href="http://t.co/NIZME82kiI">pic.twitter.com/NIZME82kiI</a></p>&mdash; Haralabos Voulgaris (@haralabob) <a href="https://twitter.com/haralabob/status/592372626992988160">April 26, 2015</a></blockquote><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-cards="hidden" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p>.<a href="https://twitter.com/mrclarkinc">@mrclarkinc</a> I am not even sure he’s a great team defender as much as he’s just on a great defensive team.</p>&mdash; Haralabos Voulgaris (@haralabob) <a href="https://twitter.com/haralabob/status/592373977592500224">April 26, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

Yeah, I agree with you. I still laugh when I see poster says Curry is a below average to bad defender. He's an above average defender. He TRIES on defense. He's no Harden on defense where Harden saves energy on defense for offense.

IMO, as a point guard Nash was better. But Curry is the better overall, more versatile player. For example, some may say Curry is the better point guard compared to Westbrook, but Westbrook may be the better/more dominant player.

 

Nash wasn't built for defense. His lack of lateral quickness hinder him on defense. He wasn't strong as well. If he played against today's athletic scoring point guards he would get killed BADLY. But I never fault him on that end, you could see in his playing days he TRIED and gave EFFORT on defense. Nash just wasn't quick, athletic, strong enough to guard top NBA point guards.

 

What's up with Asik. The commentators were torching him

Rocket River