Warriors are only called a All-Time Great Team.....

[branslowski]

to make excuses for LeBron just incase he loses these finals, Fact or Fiction?

I wanna know, cause on one stance ppl wanna say Curry is getting overrated..Well if that's the case, are we really saying that a team with Clay Thompson and Green as your 2nd n 3rd best players one of the greatest teams of All-Time?..Then I here ppl saying they better than KG, Pierce, Ray Allen's Celtics, WTF:biggums:

[warriorfan]

it's called being shook

[3ball]

to make excuses for LeBron just incase he loses these finals, Fact or Fiction?


This fact sheds light on how good the Warriors are:

In the 1993 Finals between the Bulls and Suns, both teams averaged exactly 106.7 PPG.. Both teams' Offensive Rating (ORtg) were also exactly 113.0.. Since the series was dead even, consider this:

MJ's 41/9/6/51% + far superior supporting cast = dead even series vs. 1993 Suns

Lebron's 36/12/8/39% + far inferior supporting cast > Warriors

This means Suns > Warriors

Tell me what I'm missing.
.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

They've been called an ATG team for much of the season, Cleveland making the finals didn't start that. It had everything to do with a 67-15 record, the second ranked offense, and best ranked defense during the regular season (http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats). They've also posted the second best offense and best defense during the playoffs so far (http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats/_/order/true/seasontype/3) so the numbers backing their claim as an ATG team are there.

I think that Curry is being overrated but it's tough to argue with their success and dominance as a team. Their depth is more impressive than their stars imo, they're built very well top to bottom.

[DMAVS41]

Why are people doing this?

The 10 Celtics were really good...they had an overall talent rating just below the current Warriors.

The 10 Celtics also had flaws. They were old, relied heavily on Perk and Big Baby, had basically no 3 point shooting outside of Pierce/Allen, and were the worst rebounding team in the league iirc.

To pretend like this Warriors team has no argument over them to date is absurd.

If the Warriors lose? Sure...then it's silly.

But if the Warriors win and go ****ing 83 and 20 on the year with the kind of elite play on both ends and depth....they'll be deserving to be considered at worst as good as that 10 Celtics team.

Jesus Christ....Kobe stans and Lebron haters (kind of the same thing) have reached new levels of moron

[Young X]

That's such a simplistic way of breaking down the quality of a team. You can't just list a bunch of names. That doesn't tell you how well they play together as a team on both ends especially on defense. People gotta stop doing this.

Up until the finals they were absolutely playing like an all time great team. They've struggled in the finals so far but let's wait until this series is over to determine how great they really were.

[catch24]

It depends on where you rank them All-Time

Are they up there with the super teams of the 80s, 90s, and more recently the 2005/2007/2014 Spurs, 2008/10 Celtics, or 2004 Pistons? Nope.

[Indian guy]

67 wins
Top 10 point differential of all time
MVP
Rank in the top 2 on both ends
Rank 1st on both ends in the playoffs so far

Their resume has been all-time worthy all season. And if struggling a little against a short-handed Cleveland team makes such talk blasphemous, then WTF does being taken to back-to-back 7 game series' against the freaking Hawks and Cavs do for the '08 Celtics??

[branslowski]

Meh, Yawl are overrating the f*ck out of Curry's supporting Cast...Thompson, and Green are not better than a KG or a Ray Allen...Warriors do not have defensively inside what the Celtics had with KG, Perkins and Powe....(Bogut, Lee, Green) really? And they def don't have the coaching that Celtics had with Doc.

You off da molly rite now Dmavs:facepalm

[OldSchoolBBall]

They get called that because of the gaudy numbers they put up during the regular season, but astute basketball observers knew that were a paper tiger all along. Mentally and in terms of teamwork and execution on both ends they are nowhere near an all-time level team like '86 Celts/'87 Lakers/'92/'96 Bulls/'01 Lakers, all of whom would TROUNCE this GS team.

[Wade's Rings]

Statistically they look like an ATG team. They would've needed to beaten a Healthy Grizzlies squad, Spurs/Clippers, and a Healthy Cavs Squad for me to consider them an ATG Team.

[tpols]

67 wins
Top 10 point differential of all time
MVP
Rank in the top 2 on both ends
Rank 1st on both ends in the playoffs so far

Their resume has been all-time worthy all season. And if struggling a little against a short-handed Cleveland team makes such talk blasphemous, then WTF does being taken to back-to-back 7 game series' against the freaking Hawks and Cavs do for the '08 Celtics??

The warriors are a great team talent and chemistry wise... but they are too young and inexperienced to be compared to seasoned champs.. that's why they have struggled in the finals.. they're choking.. and that's due to inexperience. Especially "the mvp".. you want prime kg or steph lol ?

[Indian guy]

but they are too young and inexperienced to be compared to seasoned champs..

Seasoned champs as in the....2008 Celtics?? :oldlol:. A team whose 3 best players had failed to make the playoffs for a combined 7 straight seasons? The only thing they were seasoned to was losing. That's why they came together to begin with. This GS core on the other hand already went through a couple of playoff wars the last 2 seasons.


you want prime kg or steph lol ?

KG was 31-32 years old in 2008 and not in his prime. 2015 Curry is a better player than 2008 KG and a couple of games isn't going to change that. And KG was very underwhelming himself in the 2008 Finals, and his 1st 3 rounds don't hold a candle to Curry's. Nobody remembers nor cares anymore but the whole 2008 postseason was dominated by "KG just doesn't have IT" talk when Celtics were mired in a dog fight every series.

[J Shuttlesworth]

Why do people keep bringing up the Warriors inexperience?

Are people forgetting that LeBron is the only one getting significant minutes who has been to the finals? Dellavedova is in his second year and is a starting PG. The only players on the Cavs who have been to the finals outside of LeBron are not even in the rotation. For Blatt, it's his first year in the NBA. I get that Kerr is a rookie coach too, but he's been part of more NBA championships than LeBron.

And it's LeBron's first year with this team, and he's only played a handful of games now without Kyrie starting.

Are people really this desperate to downplay the Warriors? All year, everyone was talking about how they are destroying the league winning 67 games, and only losing 3 games in the Western Conference Playoffs...and this is a conference that many were calling one of the best of all time. Why are people suddenly abandoning what they've been hyping up all year?

[warriorfan]

FMVPAMC30 .

[bobeticus]

Statistically they look like an ATG team. They would've needed to beaten a Healthy Grizzlies squad, Spurs/Clippers, and a Healthy Cavs Squad for me to consider them an ATG Team.

This.. they're playing in one of the worst playoff in history.... all stars are injured.... hope the nba reduce the game to 60 and bring back 1st and 2nd round to 5 game series.... :rockon: :rockon: :rockon:

[DMAVS41]

The warriors are a great team talent and chemistry wise... but they are too young and inexperienced to be compared to seasoned champs.. that's why they have struggled in the finals.. they're choking.. and that's due to inexperience. Especially "the mvp".. you want prime kg or steph lol ?

I'd take KG...and I have the 08 Celtics as better, but your logic fails you.

Those "experienced" vets you speak of looked much worse than this Warriors team ever has in the playoffs.

They went to 7 against a shit Hawks team and then 7 against a shit Cavs team. A Cavs team with a lesser Lebron and according to Kobe stans...a worse supporting cast.

So what gives? You all say the 08 Celtics are one of the best teams of all time.

But how can that be if struggling to beat bad teams in the playoffs carries so much weight?

You see how you clowns are caught here? It would be much easier if you didn't carry a BS agenda into literally every conversation.

The 08 Celtics are clearly a great team and better than others that breezed through to the title...

The 08 Celtics, were better than the 03 Spurs. Do you agree? If so, why?

[ArbitraryWater]

People like tpols contradicting themselves here everywere, massive backfire thread.