All the people who say this GSW team isn't the best in history are either just super dumb or blinded by nostalgia or both. This teams has 5 stars along with Bell, Pachulia, Livingston bench, thats 8 guys or all the players you need to win a 7 game series against anybody. I dont give a F what era it is, this team will dominate Russell's Celtics, Jordan's Bulls, Lebron's Miami team etc you name it this team will beat it. Talking about "bigs" in the 80s/90s era is dumb, you do realize 6'8 is big enough for a center in the 90s right? KD is like 7'2 how will the 6'7-6'8 forwards guard him? OTH Pachulia will be right at home in the 80s and start throwing his weight around and undercutting people left and right. Draymond Green will be Barkley 2.0 except with passing and 3 pt shooting. Even the Rockets haven't beat them full strength, somebody on their team is injured during the 2 Rockets playoff wins. That's what happens when you get the team with the most regular season wins in history and then add Kevin Durant.
Rockets have had lingering injuries too. Sorry but it doesn't work for me to parade them around as "undeniably the best in history" but they lose to mere mortal teams when someone has a booboo. If you're going to make that argument, logically we have to reach one of two conclusions: A. they're not the greatest team in history or, B. none of the players are individually great, they need everyone to win. In conclusion screw this cocky little superiority-complex dance team that they've put together.
So if you are eating at a buffet its only great if you have some crappy food out there? I don't understand your logic. They are great because they are stacked with great players.
They already proved they were the best eam in history last year. I'm not sure what you are talking about, teams lose their effectiveness when they lose their stars, duh? Jordan left the Bulls to play Baseball and they didn't reach the Finals, are you saying the Jordaneer Bulls weren't one of the best teams in history? I guess Jordan isn't individually great then, he needs Pippen and PJ and Rodman to win.
You're the funny guy who thinks 20 yrs of progress someway somehow made basketball players worse. Why don't you talk to scientists, farmers, astrologists and tell them how people 20 years ago are better than they are now?
It's hilarious how Kevin Durant gets taller and taller every year. He's 6'10, barely any taller than Larry Bird. "7 foot monsta!" And now rosolian says he's 7'2. ****ing shameful how stupid NBA fans are. What makes Kevin Durant unstoppable is that he's 6'10 which is usually 2-3" taller than the average SF and he's got orangutan arms with a high release and the skill to make those shots. 7'2...6'8 Centers in the 90s...hilarious.
I'll tell you what. I don't have to exaggerate anyone's height, size strength, speed or skill set and make claims such as "can defend 1-5" without proof or say outlandish things that can be proven wrong with facts like "6'8 centers in the 90s" or "KD is 7'2". You prove time and time again that you are nothing but a child troll with the things that you say.
Draymond Green would be Barkley 2.0 BUT EVEN BETTER with passing(bc Chuck couldn't pass) and 3pt shooting guys!!!! BC the 90s was so long ago that humans have evolved into superhumans!! Steph Curry is the GOAT!
People who think this is the best team ever have simply forgotten how good past teams have been. Klay and Green are not superstar players. You give them way too much credit. You also forget how brutal past players were. Especially bigs like Malone, Dream, Thorpe, Shaq, Ewing, Rodman, Oakley, Barkley, etc. GS is physically weak and would get their asses beat in route to the finals. They are breaking down now but you think they would be just fine playing against guys from the 90's? They are lucky they don't have to face bigs like that who would smash them every time they try to drive. That said there's no point arguing about it because they will never face the great teams from the past so there is no right or wrong. We can only say they are a great team of this era. They need to 3peat twice before we even start to compare them to the Bulls though.
I was about to disagree but then I saw you said some 90s teams. I automatically pictured them trying to stop Bean head, Horry, Elie. Drex and that's not even mentioning the greatest center of all time. Curry would have his scoring average cut in half if you could hand check him and against those 90s teams his body would be cut in half the first time he tried to drive it in the lane. He still might be the best pure shooter though.
All the more incentive for the Rockets to beat them. It's an old cliche, but a champion team can beat a team of champions. Damn, I hope we can win it all in a season like this - GSW to overcome, them the LeBron led Cavs in the final. That's perennial braggin' rights right there.
First, it's ironic to hear you say you prefer a dominating big man when you're touting the Bulls, who, at the time. were unusual and inspired fierce debate because outside of defensive specialists like Rodman and Horace Grant - possessed no such big man ever during the Jordan era, instead relying upon a committee of stiffs and role players (Cartwright, King, Perdue, Longley, Wennington....) at the 5 spot. You can argue they foreshadowed the modern era on this respect relying on wings to create even in the post-requisite strictures Of Triangle. Second I don't think this era lacks dominant big men, it's that they're so incredibly skilled they end up like Durant or LeBron or Antetokotumpo or at best a nominal 4 like Anthony Davis. Players with those combinations of size, mobility and skills on the wing didn't really exist back then - maybe Earvin but he couldn't really shoot the ball the way today's players can. Third, my argument is not some weird genetic evolution type thing (though, no doubt, players have certainly evolved mentally in terms of being conditioned to play for efficiency) but rather a function of probability. If I gave you a random sample of 100 high school basketball players, and I instead got 1200 high school basketball players from the same region to choose from, and we picked teams and had a game, chances are very high absent some weird statistical anomaly that my team would destroy your team most of the time. The talent pool today is simply much larger than it was back in the 80's
And you are just a grumpy old man who lose all your logic when you look back 20 yrs ago. Name me one active field where the experts were better 20 yrs ago? Are doctors better 20 yrs ago or today? What about MMA fighters? Engineers? Scientists? You can't give one example yet when it comes to basketball somehow the big men back then are better than today's athletes despite 20 yrs of technology and globalization. All you really have are your memories and nostalgia going for you.
Exactly. Great post. Too bad some people here can't get it through their thick skulls lol. 20 yrs from now when the average pg is 7'1 and everyone dunks from half court @Caesar is still gonna claim the big men in the 80s were better and Patrick Ewing would mop the floor with everyone lol.
Since you're talking greatness and not "most talented roster," if we win the next two for a 4 out of 6 series win -- which would mean we beat them 6 out of 9 times on the year -- does that mean WE then become the best team in NBA history? Or would they just be the best team in NBA history who can't seem to even win two consecutive titles like so many other team (including the Rockets) have done?
No, it would be an upset. Not Buster Douglas being Mike Tyson level but more like George Foreman beating Muhammad Ali
Andre Iguodala is not a star at this point in his career, so they have four stars, for one thing. Second, the Warriors were at full strength in game 2, and got destroyed. Don’t give me that BS that Curry isn’t healthy. If you can drop 40 against the Pelicans and 26 in a quarter against the Rockets, your knee is just fine. The fact is a Rockets lineup of Paul, Harden, Gordon, Ariza, and Tucker has the offensive and defensive firepower to hang with the Warriors Hamptons 5.
I agree. It would also mean that (at least for now) the Warriors are NOT the best team in NBA history. Gotta defend a title at least once to be the greatest EVER, right? Unless you're just talking roster talent.
