No he played 30 games. 16-14
Hell of an impact
so they went 3-0 , you made it sound like he missed 16 and just from 3 games you have come up with they are better without him.
I could careless about him but he is a good ball player and they would of already been home in this tourney if he wasnt on the floor
so they went 3-0 , you made it sound like he missed 16 and just from 3 games you have come up with they are better without him.
I could careless about him but he is a good ball player and they would of already been home in this tourney if he wasnt on the floor
To be fair the 3 games without him isn't a big enough sample size I agree but the year before and his 30 games played is plenty big enough to show he team wasn't any better with him than last year. In fact bama was a little worse with him than the year before
To be fair the 3 games without him isn't a big enough sample size I agree but the year before and his 30 games played is plenty big enough to show he team wasn't any better with him than last year. In fact bama was a little worse with him than the year before
To be fair the 3 games without him isn't a big enough sample size I agree but the year before and his 30 games played is plenty big enough to show he team wasn't any better with him than last year. In fact bama was a little worse with him than the year before
Curry gonna be out the next 2 games for GS with an ankle injury.
If they go 2-0 I will consider the Warriors better without him. Just look at their record with him and then without.
To be fair the 3 games without him isn't a big enough sample size I agree but the year before and his 30 games played is plenty big enough to show the team wasn't any better with him than last year. fact bama was a little worse with him than the year before