Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend
Lobby Okay Sports topic #2612375

Subject: "Which team is the greatest NBA team - EVER?" Previous topic | Next topic
Wordsmith
Charter member
941 posts
Thu Jun-08-17 04:35 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
"Poll question: Which team is the greatest NBA team - EVER?"
Thu Jun-08-17 04:39 PM by Wordsmith

  

          

Add any others! My addition '83 Sixers and '01 Lakers.

Poll result (39 votes)
95-96 Bulls (16 votes)Vote
86 Celtics (0 votes)Vote
72 Lakers (1 votes)Vote
80s Showtime Lakers (5 votes)Vote
60s Celtics (3 votes)Vote
2017 Warriors (14 votes)Vote

  

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top


Topic Outline
Subject Author Message Date ID
You may as well ask,"how old are you and where do you live?"
Jun 08th 2017
1
We had this discussion at the barbershop the other day
Jun 08th 2017
2
3-peat Lakers
Jun 08th 2017
3
lol, no, not even the best laker team (showtime, 70s)
Jun 08th 2017
8
      that 2001 team could hang with any 70's Laker team
Jun 15th 2017
37
It depends on what you mean by team.
Jun 08th 2017
4
Look at the mpg
Jun 16th 2017
38
if goofy ass ZaZa didn't injure Kawhi GS probably get 2 Ls...
Jun 08th 2017
5
^^^^^ Finally someone mentions the elephant in the room that
Jun 08th 2017
6
      although I took a mad L...I did bring that up before the Finals...
Jun 08th 2017
7
      The Warriors wiggled out of a tighter spot with the Cavs on Wednesday
Jun 09th 2017
13
           fuck nah man, if KL is healthy, Spurs win Game 1, period.
Jun 11th 2017
27
1. showtime lakers
Jun 08th 2017
9
def. agree with #1.... they are the GOLD (and Forum Blue) standard
Jun 12th 2017
28
there's a difference between the best and the greatest
Jun 08th 2017
10
RE: Which team is the greatest NBA team - EVER?
Jun 08th 2017
11
It seems like we are not defining the parameters very well here
Jun 09th 2017
12
these are contradictory statements imo:
Jun 09th 2017
14
      RE: these are contradictory statements imo:
Jun 11th 2017
24
           yeah, we just disagree on this one.
Jun 15th 2017
30
                again we are talking one year, a full run or a three-year run?
Jun 15th 2017
34
lolz. coach kerr made a funny.
Jun 09th 2017
15
The 2017 Warriors aren't even the GOAT Warriors squad.
Jun 10th 2017
20
      Run-TMC beats them by 10 and the Chris Webber squad is a push
Jun 10th 2017
22
People are seriously voting for the Warriors?!?!?!?!
Jun 09th 2017
16
lol cmon
Jun 10th 2017
18
90s romanticism needs to die, promptly and harshly
Jun 10th 2017
19
I don't think the sonics or suns get demoralized
Jun 15th 2017
33
      Yeah, those Sonics were 64-18....they could hang
Jun 16th 2017
41
           IMO they had a chance with better coaching
Jun 16th 2017
42
huh? Explain
Jun 10th 2017
21
lol what?
Jun 11th 2017
25
Klay Thompson's a HOF'er c'mon...
Jun 12th 2017
29
right? They never would've got past Dan Majerle and the Suns!
Jun 15th 2017
32
2001 Lakers had the best two players in the league, lost one game in OT....
Jun 10th 2017
17
that was the most dominant playoff run i have seen
Jun 11th 2017
26
1982-83 Sixers
Jun 10th 2017
23
wait I thought that Miami team was a "SuperTeam" though.
Jun 15th 2017
31
Would you like some popcorn with that salt?
Jun 15th 2017
35
not sure i understand the comment
Jun 16th 2017
43
96 Bulls
Jun 15th 2017
36
I already help b-ball opinions here in low esteem, but this?
Jun 16th 2017
39
I'm saying, the star power is there plus more DEPTH
Jun 16th 2017
44
Yea, I would give it to Warriors
Jun 16th 2017
40

Cold Truth
Member since Jan 28th 2004
42357 posts
Thu Jun-08-17 04:37 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
1. "You may as well ask,"how old are you and where do you live?""
In response to Reply # 0
Thu Jun-08-17 04:38 PM by Cold Truth

  

          

It seems to me that the answers to "GOAT team/player" questions seem strongly align with the answer to those two questions.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
BrooklynWHAT
Member since Jun 15th 2007
81903 posts
Thu Jun-08-17 05:48 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
2. "We had this discussion at the barbershop the other day"
In response to Reply # 1


  

          

I've had the same barber since I was 9 and his rule was always if you under 25 your opinion doesnt count. You just sit and listen.

Now all the old heads there this weekend said this GSW the coldest shit they've ever seen, and they really haven't even scratched the surface of their greatness.

I saw 95/96 cause WGN showed damn near all the games national, but I was a kid so whatever. MJ was a superhero to me moreso than a bball player.

I will say this team might be colder than Shaq and Kobe which was the best team I've seen since I really started to understand the game.

Anything before that I'm basically just guessing from Rewatching old games. I really wish the NBA was on their shit like NFL films

<--- Big Baller World Order

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

ThaTruth
Charter member
94330 posts
Thu Jun-08-17 06:00 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
3. "3-peat Lakers"
In response to Reply # 0


          

________________________________________
"Stay out the dark, cause if I catch you when the sun is down..."
https://youtu.be/eaaTxVRG06c?t=89

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
71344 posts
Thu Jun-08-17 10:16 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
8. "lol, no, not even the best laker team (showtime, 70s)"
In response to Reply # 3


  

          

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
justin_scott
Charter member
19829 posts
Thu Jun-15-17 10:57 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
37. "that 2001 team could hang with any 70's Laker team"
In response to Reply # 8


          

.

************************************************************

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Buck
Member since Feb 15th 2005
15662 posts
Thu Jun-08-17 06:11 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
4. "It depends on what you mean by team."
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

That sounds stupid, but let me explain. In my lifetime, it's either Showtime Lakers or Jordan Bulls. But they seem different, in that those Bulls were one dude who was otherworldly, another guy who was really good, and then a roster of specialists, who did just the one thing and did it extremely well.

Those Lakers, though, seemed like the talent was more evenly distributed. The 86-87 team had six guys averaging double figures. 95-96 Bulls had 3.

So "best collection of players," to me, is Lakers. "GOAT + perfect supporting cast," Bulls.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
cgonz00cc
Member since Aug 01st 2002
32965 posts
Fri Jun-16-17 07:42 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
38. "Look at the mpg"
In response to Reply # 4


  

          

Lakers had a few more 27+ mpg guys than the bulls did, and the bulls had post-93 rodman scoring 5 ppg in 32 mpg. Plus those Lakers had a distributor that was just a wee bit better than anything the Bulls had.

Seems like a mirage number given the context.

WHAT A TIME TO BE ALIVE

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

LegacyNS
Member since Jan 16th 2004
37956 posts
Thu Jun-08-17 06:27 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
5. "if goofy ass ZaZa didn't injure Kawhi GS probably get 2 Ls..."
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

then you mofos would have less cover for this plea party you're attempting to throw for LeBron & the fact that the East has been trash juice..


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- 5....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dlgiritpmfo

=======================================

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Mignight Maruder
Member since Nov 30th 2003
7503 posts
Thu Jun-08-17 08:44 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
6. "^^^^^ Finally someone mentions the elephant in the room that"
In response to Reply # 5


  

          

EVERYONE seems to have forgotten already; the Spurs were up 20 midway through the 3rd before Kawhi went out and thus destroyed any hope the Spurs had for beating the W's. With a healthy Kawhi the Spurs win game 1 and at the least, one more. But folks around here acting like this is the most unstoppable force of a team ever assembled. Respect to the Ws but the hyperbole is out of control and there most definitely will need to be an asterisk if they try to rep the 16-0 bs.

The Cavs give themselves no chance with their shitty defense. The Spurs are less talented, but I have no doubt they could have beat this current Cavs team.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Dstl1
Charter member
51959 posts
Thu Jun-08-17 09:11 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
7. "although I took a mad L...I did bring that up before the Finals..."
In response to Reply # 6
Thu Jun-08-17 09:13 PM by Dstl1

          

http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13160435&mesg_id=13160435&page=#13161007

when I threw the rifle in the river,
it looked like Bol Bol was diving in the river - Action Bronson

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
Cocobrotha2
Charter member
10811 posts
Fri Jun-09-17 09:18 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
13. "The Warriors wiggled out of a tighter spot with the Cavs on Wednesday"
In response to Reply # 6


          

>EVERYONE seems to have forgotten already; the Spurs were up
>20 midway through the 3rd before Kawhi went out and thus
>destroyed any hope the Spurs had for beating the W's. With a
>healthy Kawhi the Spurs win game 1 and at the least, one more.
>But folks around here acting like this is the most unstoppable
>force of a team ever assembled. Respect to the Ws but the
>hyperbole is out of control and there most definitely will
>need to be an asterisk if they try to rep the 16-0 bs.
>
>The Cavs give themselves no chance with their shitty defense.
>The Spurs are less talented, but I have no doubt they could
>have beat this current Cavs team.

While the spurs are a better team than the Cavs, I'd still put my money on Warriors coming back from 20 in the 3rd, at home, even with a healthy Kawhi.

<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->
<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
71344 posts
Sun Jun-11-17 03:41 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
27. "fuck nah man, if KL is healthy, Spurs win Game 1, period."
In response to Reply # 13


  

          

i am not talking about the whole series, i think dubs in six most likely, but i do think that first game was a lock with a healthy leonard.

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

kayru99
Member since Jan 26th 2004
15880 posts
Thu Jun-08-17 10:34 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
9. "1. showtime lakers"
In response to Reply # 0


          

2. 86 Celtics >>>>>>>>>

everybody else

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Dr Claw
Member since Jun 25th 2003
131268 posts
Mon Jun-12-17 03:45 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
28. "def. agree with #1.... they are the GOLD (and Forum Blue) standard"
In response to Reply # 9


  

          

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Ill Jux
Member since Jan 19th 2007
14694 posts
Thu Jun-08-17 11:44 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
10. "there's a difference between the best and the greatest"
In response to Reply # 0


          

greatness includes legacy, and measured over a period of time. this is the warriors first year with durant, so i don't know why they're up there.

______

in the memory of NYC upt JUX�

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Ill Jux
Member since Jan 19th 2007
14694 posts
Thu Jun-08-17 11:46 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
11. "RE: Which team is the greatest NBA team - EVER?"
In response to Reply # 0


          

this poll is flawed. why have one season teams and teams of an entire decade?

______

in the memory of NYC upt JUX�

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
71344 posts
Fri Jun-09-17 02:17 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
12. "It seems like we are not defining the parameters very well here"
In response to Reply # 0
Fri Jun-09-17 02:17 AM by ConcreteCharlie

  

          

Some of these teams are one season, others span a decade, WTF?

Are we talking quality? Performance? Over time? Over one season? One playoff? Huh?

If we are talking a single season these Dubs and last year's are in the convo. They don't compare to the height of the Celtics dynasty though nor the best of Showtime or the '67 Sixers and you could find some pretty amazing competitors depending on what we are looking at. For a single playoff, not many teams were more dominant than the '01 Lakers. The '83 Sixers are there, too. Over time, hard to argue with the Cs' NINE STRAIGHT TITLES and 11 in 13 years! Having four superstars at that time was the minimum to compete, not an unbeatable advantage. The '70s had some incredible, deep, overlooked teams. The Lakers with Wilt, West and Goodrich? THIRTY THREE straight wins? Plenty of 12-man teams and rosters brimming with stars, but they didn't sustain excellence (there was a lot instability with a competing league, among other things).

I think anyone claiming this team is the best ever is not very up on the history of the game, or they are hiding behind a dumb "today's guys kill your heroes!" argument. By that logic, the best team in each successive year is the best ever because players keep getting bigger, stronger, faster, better trained, etc. If we are talking a legit, all-time argument, then no, you can't go for these guys.

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
dula dibiasi
Member since Apr 05th 2004
21925 posts
Fri Jun-09-17 09:53 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
14. "these are contradictory statements imo:"
In response to Reply # 12


  

          

>
>If we are talking a single season these Dubs and last year's
>are in the convo.
>
>
>I think anyone claiming this team is the best ever is not very
>up on the history of the game
>

essentially: they can be on the shortlist, but just not at the top, you ignorant prisoner-of-the-moment n00b!!!

i don't understand that.

to me, if you're "in the convo", it means there's a credible argument to be made that you're #1. there can be a credible argument for multiple teams, but only those teams are in the discussion.

if the dubs take it tonight, there's certainly a credible GOAT argument.

most wins in a single regular season and in a consecutive 3 year stretch, top 1 or 2 on both ends of the floor, 2 of 3 titles, and 16-0.

that's as good a 3 year run as anyone's put together.

they're obviously not going to win 8 straight or 11 of 13, no one ever will again, fagency and salary structure basically prevent teams from keeping a core together that long. but it's 3 years you can put up against anyone ever.

i also don't think we've ever seen 4 all league guys in their prime (27-28 y.o.) on the same roster. certainly not in a league this size. maybe in the 60's. but it's usually the case that either one of the guys is a little past his peak, or the 4th guy just isn't quite that good. but 4 top 25 guys? nah.

___

it is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. - sherlock holmes

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
71344 posts
Sun Jun-11-17 03:02 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
24. "RE: these are contradictory statements imo:"
In response to Reply # 14


  

          


>essentially: they can be on the shortlist, but just not at the
>top, you ignorant prisoner-of-the-moment n00b!!!
>
>i don't understand that.
>
>to me, if you're "in the convo", it means there's a credible
>argument to be made that you're #1. there can be a credible
>argument for multiple teams, but only those teams are in the
>discussion.
>
>if the dubs take it tonight, there's certainly a credible GOAT
>argument.
>
>most wins in a single regular season and in a consecutive 3
>year stretch, top 1 or 2 on both ends of the floor, 2 of 3
>titles, and 16-0.
>
>that's as good a 3 year run as anyone's put together.


Being in the convo and being number one are two different things, and to be in the convo we have to make qualifiers left and right. So not really contradictory, more trying to give them credit while still saying firmly they are not the best. Is this a better three-year run than the Bulls had from 96-98? Hard to make that argument since Chicago won three straight, set the wins record (with only one less win), etc. Those were probably their most talented opponents, too. Then you have eight straight for Boston and a repeat that was spectacular and able to add new dimensions to their legacy (on the heels of being beaten by a team that may have been the single best in history itself, certainly it set the wins record).

They didn't close it out in fact they had one of the worst defensive performances in Finals history. Even if they had swept, I still think it would be very much a prisoner-of-the-moment thing to call them the best ever. They have four stars? Whoopty-damnn-doo (c) DC. That's what makes them the beat team of their era, not all-time, because historically that isn't the highest bar.

>they're obviously not going to win 8 straight or 11 of 13, no
>one ever will again, fagency and salary structure basically
>prevent teams from keeping a core together that long. but it's
>3 years you can put up against anyone ever.

You can put it against, but does it win? We both know it doesn't.

>i also don't think we've ever seen 4 all league guys in their
>prime (27-28 y.o.) on the same roster. certainly not in a
>league this size. maybe in the 60's. but it's usually the case
>that either one of the guys is a little past his peak, or the
>4th guy just isn't quite that good. but 4 top 25 guys? nah.

The Celtics were pretty close, the Chief was older but since he played until he was 70 his 30s were more like his 20s anyway. Their ages were a little more staggered but not much between Bird, McHale, DJ and also Ainge.

There weren't necessarily four HOF'ers but there were two and a lot of good players, all the same age in Portland. Sort of similar to their current approach, they had one big ass star and a bunch of guys roughly the same age on their title team. Wes Unseld, Elvin Hayes, Bob Dandridge and Phil Chenier played their primes together for the Bullets (they faced a very close-in-age trio of Sonics in two Finals also, along with Lonnie Shelton). So I don't see this as anything unprecedented. It's unusual for the era, I guess, but the Spurs have had some impressive collections of players and the Heat had four HOF'ers on their title teams, only one that was old (and he still chipped in big time).

I am impressed with Golden State, obviously, but to throw around this lofty stuff like best-ever and unprecedented seems a bit much.

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
dula dibiasi
Member since Apr 05th 2004
21925 posts
Thu Jun-15-17 10:41 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
30. "yeah, we just disagree on this one."
In response to Reply # 24


  

          

i honestly can't see how a team that holds the best single season winning percentage, in both regular and post, doesn't have a credible argument for the #1 spot.

that logic escapes me.

mind you, i'm not calling them THE definitive best. that's not really something that i believe in, a singular GOAT. i believe in a pantheon, a selection of viable contenders, and this team is absolutely in that group.

___

it is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. - sherlock holmes

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
71344 posts
Thu Jun-15-17 03:15 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
34. "again we are talking one year, a full run or a three-year run?"
In response to Reply # 30


  

          

three-year run they are one of the best not the best. full run TBD. one season? sorta hurts that their best season and best playoffs were not in the same year. they were like that pats who went 18-0 before losing the super bowl last year. this year they coasted a little more during the year. i think next year they have a chance to put it all together. we'll see. for now i still look at teams who won more and in some cases in more competitive eras as being better.

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

dula dibiasi
Member since Apr 05th 2004
21925 posts
Fri Jun-09-17 06:38 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
15. "lolz. coach kerr made a funny."
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

http://deadspin.com/steve-kerr-lays-on-the-sarcasm-toward-former-nbaers-who-1795966954

The Golden State Warriors are the best NBA team of all time. So naturally, ex-NBA guys are popping up everywhere to claim that they — unlike the Cavaliers, featuring three superstars including one of the two greatest NBA players ever — could have beaten the Warriors.

Magic Johnson says the Showtime Lakers totally would have swept Golden State. Rasheed Wallace and Rip Hamilton agree: The 2004 Pistons would have won. Julius Erving says the ‘83 Sixers would’ve beaten the Warriors. If you hear former champs tell it, these Warriors will apparently be the worst title team of all time.

Steve Kerr has heard it, and he totally agrees.

https://twitter.com/SNFaizalKhamisa/status/873247964172603393

“They’re all right, they would kill us. The game gets worse as time goes on. Players are less talented than they used to be. The guys in the ‘50s would’ve destroyed everybody. It’s weird how human evolution...goes in reverse in sports. Players get weaker, smaller, less skilled. I can’t explain it.”

Fuck ‘em up, Steve.

___

it is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. - sherlock holmes

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
khn
Member since Jan 20th 2015
290 posts
Sat Jun-10-17 05:11 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
20. "The 2017 Warriors aren't even the GOAT Warriors squad."
In response to Reply # 15


          

Word to Rick Barry and Jamaal Wilkes. lulz!

They might have a slim chance against the We Believe squad of 2007, though. But only if Mikael Pietrus and Dejuan Wagner couldn't play.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
DJR
Member since Jan 01st 2005
16536 posts
Sat Jun-10-17 07:16 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
22. "Run-TMC beats them by 10 and the Chris Webber squad is a push"
In response to Reply # 20


  

          

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

b2thej
Member since Feb 11th 2005
9146 posts
Fri Jun-09-17 07:07 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
16. "People are seriously voting for the Warriors?!?!?!?! "
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

I can't tell when niggas is being serious on here anymore bc of agendas but I'm having a hard time picturing the Warriors beating any team that lost to the Bulls in the finals.

PSN ID - dirty_MF_bucks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
pretentious username
Member since Jun 18th 2010
11709 posts
Sat Jun-10-17 04:14 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
18. "lol cmon"
In response to Reply # 16


  

          

>I can't tell when niggas is being serious on here anymore bc
>of agendas but I'm having a hard time picturing the Warriors
>beating any team that lost to the Bulls in the finals.

i think there's just as much bias in favor of old basketball teams as there is for recent teams. they would mop the floor with the bulls' opponents.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
khn
Member since Jan 20th 2015
290 posts
Sat Jun-10-17 05:06 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
19. "90s romanticism needs to die, promptly and harshly"
In response to Reply # 16


          

The Warriors would dismantle and demoralize every single one of those squads. Like, over a course of a series they would beat those teams by an average of 30 points. Wait, maybe I'm being unfair. The Sonics and the Jazz could probably keep it around 20.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
cgonz00cc
Member since Aug 01st 2002
32965 posts
Thu Jun-15-17 02:19 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
33. "I don't think the sonics or suns get demoralized "
In response to Reply # 19


  

          

Those teams had 3 AS in their primes, the Suns with 2 in the backcourt. KJ and Thunder Dan vs Steph and Klay would have been fun imo.

The Jazz get destroyed. They were a transition finalist between the Drexler/Dream years and had their 3 beat players in their mid 30s. Steps and Klay FEAST.

The Lakers and Blazers...idk. Those were lean years in the West.

WHAT A TIME TO BE ALIVE

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
DJR
Member since Jan 01st 2005
16536 posts
Fri Jun-16-17 09:21 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
41. "Yeah, those Sonics were 64-18....they could hang"
In response to Reply # 33


  

          

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
71344 posts
Fri Jun-16-17 11:54 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
42. "IMO they had a chance with better coaching"
In response to Reply # 41


  

          

If you switched the two coaches it would have been a seven-game series.

The Suns I do think would have gotten beaten pretty handily by the Dubs. Barkley was playing his ass off to keep them afloat but it was kind of like LeBron in the first Dubs series. He did all he could and it wasn't enough. Not enough horses there.

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
DJR
Member since Jan 01st 2005
16536 posts
Sat Jun-10-17 07:05 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
21. "huh? Explain"
In response to Reply # 16


  

          

>I can't tell when niggas is being serious on here anymore bc
>of agendas but I'm having a hard time picturing the Warriors
>beating any team that lost to the Bulls in the finals.

They've got two MVP's and two other all stars as well as some good role players - one of whom used to be an all star. They can't beat any 90's finalist? Cmon.

I voted for the showtime Lakers. But these Warriors are certainly a great team.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
71344 posts
Sun Jun-11-17 03:06 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
25. "lol what?"
In response to Reply # 16


  

          

the bulls pretty some fairly suspect finalists and so did the threepeat lakers. i don't think that takes away too much from either but to say these other teams would have competed with the warriors or beaten them easily? hell nah. barkley was playing out of his mind but that suns team was otherwise a weird mix of past its prime and inexperienced, except dan majerle i guess. the blazers were always the bridesmaid, you think they would have gotten over the hump where they couldn't against the lakers with some semblance of a real kareem, the pistons and the bulls? i doubt it. the lakers were kind of shabby, honestly i have a hard time figuring out how they made that finals with some of the quality teams in the west that season. the sonics had a lot of talent but not a lot of brains, it would be a fun matchup but the dubs would win on coaching alone, plus they are a better team. the jazz were formidable but could they run with golden state? not a chance. too much tempo.

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
ThaTruth
Charter member
94330 posts
Mon Jun-12-17 04:03 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
29. "Klay Thompson's a HOF'er c'mon..."
In response to Reply # 16


          

________________________________________
"Stay out the dark, cause if I catch you when the sun is down..."
https://youtu.be/eaaTxVRG06c?t=89

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Vex_id
Charter member
65065 posts
Thu Jun-15-17 01:02 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
32. "right? They never would've got past Dan Majerle and the Suns!"
In response to Reply # 16


          


-->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

theeraser
Member since Feb 11th 2007
7218 posts
Sat Jun-10-17 03:59 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
17. "2001 Lakers had the best two players in the league, lost one game in OT...."
In response to Reply # 0


          

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
71344 posts
Sun Jun-11-17 03:08 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
26. "that was the most dominant playoff run i have seen"
In response to Reply # 17


  

          

shaq was just on another level and kobe was slamming doors when he had the opportunities. the way they rolled through san antonio was really impressive.

the '83 sixers are right there, but they did get kind of lucky to face a banged-up lakers in the finals. i think they would have won the series anyway (kareem agrees) but it would not have been a sweep, no way.

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Selassie I God
Member since Feb 21st 2006
10355 posts
Sat Jun-10-17 09:29 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
23. "1982-83 Sixers"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

____
Some will tell you that they love you but they've got an ulterior motive - Oh what a shame
They will tell you that they need you but they've got an ulterior motive - Personal gain

(c) Luciano


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fg0-qndkemo

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Vex_id
Charter member
65065 posts
Thu Jun-15-17 12:53 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
31. "wait I thought that Miami team was a "SuperTeam" though."
In response to Reply # 0


          

Guess not.

-->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Ryan M
Member since Oct 21st 2002
41497 posts
Thu Jun-15-17 03:16 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
35. "Would you like some popcorn with that salt?"
In response to Reply # 31


  

          

------------------------------

17x NBA Champions

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
71344 posts
Fri Jun-16-17 11:55 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
43. "not sure i understand the comment"
In response to Reply # 31


  

          

not all the super teams are on that list

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

wluv
Member since Jan 27th 2003
4346 posts
Thu Jun-15-17 10:47 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
36. "96 Bulls"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

Warriors are a great team no doubt but i have a hard time seeing them beating the 88-89 Pistons. There is no way KD would have had the open lane layups he had in this series with Mahorn, Rodman, Laimbeer, and Salley patrolling the middle. By the 3rd time they put him on his ass, he'd stay out of there. Draymond would be pushed out to the perimeter too. And Id like to see Dumars on Clay and Stephon for a whole game. Warriors would probably have the edge in the transition game but Id think those Pistons would have worn down these Warriors over a 7 game series the way they did those early Bulls teams.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Basaglia
Member since Nov 30th 2004
49462 posts
Fri Jun-16-17 08:38 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
39. "I already help b-ball opinions here in low esteem, but this? "
In response to Reply # 0


  

          


this is bad.

lakers would murk GS. period.

____________________________________________________


Steph: I was just fooling about

Kyrie: I wasn't.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8OWNspU_yE

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
ConcreteCharlie
Member since Nov 21st 2002
71344 posts
Fri Jun-16-17 11:55 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
44. "I'm saying, the star power is there plus more DEPTH"
In response to Reply # 39


  

          

And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

okayplayery
Member since Aug 25th 2012
516 posts
Fri Jun-16-17 09:19 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
40. "Yea, I would give it to Warriors"
In response to Reply # 0


          

They have 4 legit 'triple threat' guys in Curry-KD-Klay-Green, which is unheard of. It means that:
(a) they can and will exploit every possible mismatch they can find, using their passing, driving and screening, not to mention elite shooting
(b) they can mix and match however they please and they will be equally effective playing big, small and everything in between

(a) means that you can't really play straight up basketball with them, they will kill you sooner or later.
(b) means that they don't really have a weak spot and will match up with anything you'll throw at them.

Most of the time they don't need schemes, they play read and react bball, so you'll need to have high defensive IQ players on your roster *top to bottom* to compete. If you have even one guy who's a defensive liability in your regular rotation, who you can't bench - you're done. If he's a bigman? You're getting steamrolled. Sorry '86 Celtics and '87-88 Lakers.

The only way to beat them is trying to disrupt the rhythm of the game as much as possible, fouling, delaying, beating them up and playing mind games. But event then, chances are slim, cause even though Curry can be bothered by physicality (as we've seen last year), when Klay is hot, he can't be touched. He is a weakest ballhandler of the bunch, but when he's on, he doesn't need to dribble, he will just rise up.

That's not even mentioning that Draymond always comes to play and KD is a killer and a physical freak, who can not be guarded one on one. Jorn's Bulls and Isiah's Pistons might make it a series, but other than that? Nah

  

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Lobby Okay Sports topic #2612375 Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.25
Copyright © DCScripts.com