Compare this GSW team with the '89 Pistons

[iamgine]

About comparable? (Not in playing style of course)

[1987_Lakers]

People complain about the Warriors easy run to a title how about the '89 Pistons?

Round 1: Celtics without Bird
Round 2: Bucks without Cummings (their best player)
Conference Finals: Bulls and M. Jordan with scrubs
Finals: Lakers without Magic & B. Scott

That run was much easier than the Warriors run.

[Duderonomy]

Thompson and Curry are like Dumars and Thomas.
Bogut is Laimbeer. Iggy is Mark Aguirre.
Beyond that I got nothing.

[1987_Lakers]

And yes, they are about comparable. Both backcourts were the best in the NBA, both teams had insane depth, Warriors probably dominated their competition just a bit more.

[iamgine]

Thompson and Curry are like Dumars and Thomas.
Bogut is Laimbeer. Iggy is Mark Aguirre.
Beyond that I got nothing.

Steve Kerr vs Chuck Daly

Same letters configuration in their name!

[1987_Lakers]

Thompson and Curry are like Dumars and Thomas.
Bogut is Laimbeer. Iggy is Mark Aguirre.
Beyond that I got nothing.

Bogut and Laimbeer were completely different players. Laimbeer was more offensive minded who could knock down jumpers, Bogut was the better defender and a much better rim protector.

I'd probably take Iggy over that version of Aguirre, Iggy is just a more complete/versatile player.

Also Draymond Green > Mahorn

[ClipperRevival]

I consider the 1989 Pistons to be one of the top 7ish teams ever. They were 2 FTs away in game 7 from 3 peating and 3 peating is truly special, especially in the modern era. GS will have to go on a similiar run the next few years to compare to them historically. I think sometimes people are too quick to compare a current player or team to the best ever without giving them a chance to prove themselves over time. Let's see what they do the next few years.

Isiah was Curry. Dumars was Klay. Rodman/Aguirre was Barnes/Iggy. Vinnie was Livingston. The Pistons definitely had the edge in bigs with Laimbeer, Mahorn and Sally. The Pistons could play half court or up tempo. We all saw that GS struggles in the half court. If a team can force them to play half court, you have a good chance of beating them. I think the Pistons had the D, talent and style to do that.

[Kobe_6/8]

People complain about the Warriors easy run to a title how about the '89 Pistons?

Round 1: Celtics without Bird
Round 2: Bucks without Cummings (their best player)
Conference Finals: Bulls and M. Jordan with scrubs
Finals: Lakers without Magic & B. Scott

That run was much easier than the Warriors run.

http://knightpage.wikispaces.com/file/view/oxymoron.jpg/325531134/202x202/oxymoron.jpg

Michael Jordan had such an impact that the Pistons had to create 'The Jordan Rules'.

GSW never faced anyone near that caliber for their title run.

[ClipperRevival]

Forgot about Draymond and he compares to Rodman. GS is a very deep team, that's for sure. But I want to see what they do the next few years before I rank them historically.

[1987_Lakers]

Forgot about Draymond and he compares to Rodman. GS is a very deep team, that's for sure. But I want to see what they do the next few years before I rank them historically.

Question for you. Where do you rank a team like the 1983 Sixers, they were a dominant team that won 65 games and lost only 1 game in the postseason, but never returned to the Finals.

[1987_Lakers]

http://knightpage.wikispaces.com/file/view/oxymoron.jpg/325531134/202x202/oxymoron.jpg

Michael Jordan had such an impact that the Pistons had to create 'The Jordan Rules'.

GSW never faced anyone near that caliber for their title run.

LeBron James.

[Kobe_6/8]

LeBron James.

(Including all healthy players at time of NBA Finals)
1989 Bulls minus Jordan >>>>>>>>>>> 2015 Cavs minus LeBron

[24-Inch_Chrome]

To be fair, how difficult was the Pistons' run in 1988? They were a phantom foul call away from the title that year.

[ClipperRevival]

Question for you. Where do you rank a team like the 1983 Sixers, they were a dominant team that won 65 games and lost only 1 game in the postseason, but never returned to the Finals.

Top 10ish. They lost in the finals in 1980 and 1982 to the Showtime Lakers. That's exactly what I am talking about. You have to do it over a few years, even if it means losing in the finals against another great team. There is no shame in losing twice to the Showtime Lakers. Let's see what GS does the next few years before we rank them historically.

Same situation with the 2008 Celtics. They only won 1 but had deep runs for a few years to warrant being up there historically. They lost in game 7 in 2010 and might've won it had Perkins been healthy. And KG was injured in 2009.

[1987_Lakers]

(Including all healthy players at time of NBA Finals)
1989 Bulls minus Jordan >>>>>>>>>>> 2015 Cavs minus LeBron

Are you really going to ignore how the Pistons played 3 teams in the playoffs without their best player? (Bird, Cummings, & Magic)

At least Golden State still had to deal with Anthony Davis, Marc Gasol, Zach Randolph, James Harden, Dwight Howard, & LeBron. All these guys are Superstar/All-Star caliber.

What All-Star did Detroit go up against besides Jordan & McHale?

[1987_Lakers]

Top 10ish. They lost in the finals in 1980 and 1982 to the Showtime Lakers. That's exactly what I am talking about. You have to do it over a few years, even if it means losing in the finals against another great team. There is no shame in losing twice to the Showtime Lakers. Let's see what GS does the next few years before we rank them historically.

Same situation with the 2008 Celtics. They only won 1 but had deep runs for a few years to warrant being up there historically. They lost in game 7 in 2010 and might've won it had Perkins been healthy. And KG was injured in 2009.

Good post. I won't argue. We still have to see how Golden State does these upcoming years, but if D. Green comes back they should be contenders next year. It's gonna be tough with OKC in the way & the Clippers might improve. Spurs don't impress me unless they sign LMA.

[ClipperRevival]

Are you really going to ignore how the Pistons played 3 teams in the playoffs without their best player? (Bird, Cummings, & Magic)

At least Golden State still had to deal with Anthony Davis, Marc Gasol, Zach Randolph, James Harden, Dwight Howard, & LeBron. All these guys are Superstar/All-Star caliber.

What All-Star did Detroit go up against besides Jordan & McHale?

That's pretty weak. You play who you have to play. It shouldn't take away from them because they were battling the Celtics, Lakers and Bulls when they were at full strength prior to 1989 and after 1989 and beat them all. Greatness is greatness, and sometimes you are forced to play inferior teams and/or teams that aren't at full strength.

[ClipperRevival]

Good post. I won't argue. We still have to see how Golden State does these upcoming years, but if D. Green comes back they should be contenders next year. It's gonna be tough with OKC in the way & the Clippers might improve. Spurs don't impress me unless they sign LMA.

No doubt. GS is amazingly stacked. Chances are, they will make deep runs over the next few years. But they still have to do it to and nothing is given to you at this level.

[1987_Lakers]

That's pretty weak. You play who have to play. It shouldn't take away from them because they were battling the Celtics, Lakers and Bulls when they were at full strength prior to 1989 and after 1989 and beat them all. Greatness is greatness, and sometimes you are forced to play inferior teams and/or teams that aren't at full strength.

Only reason why I bought that up is for the people who criticize the Warriors run. I know the Pistons are worthy champions, they were a steal away from making the Finals in '87 and a foul away from winning the title in '88, they proved to be an all-time great team and they changed the way teams play defense.

[ClipperRevival]

Only reason why I bought that up is for the people who criticize the Warriors run. I know the Pistons are worthy champions, they were a steal away from making the Finals in '87 and a foul away from winning the title in '88, they proved to be an all-time great team and they changed the way teams play defense.

:cheers:

[Harison]

Team play and both teams run by star PG are the only similarities. Otherwise they are very different teams, especially mentality wise. Pistons were tough as nails, gritty and very dirty team, Wars are nothing like that.

[SHAQisGOAT]

I like the comparison... Both teams led by a PG, both teams don't have what you'd call a top20 GOAT peak superstar yet both teams very stacked with a deep bench, cohesive with everybody knowing their role. Both had terrific seasons as champs.

Comparing their rotation players...

Some will already say they'd pick Curry over Isiah, other will just give the '**** no' to that... I'mma just call it a wash in terms of impact in order to avoid that whole discussion... They both have areas in which they're above the other; passing/playmaking, slashing/finishing, defense and clutchness for Zeke, while shooting, overall scoring, probably even better rebounding too for Steph.
I'll say that Stephen wouldn't be nearly as "effective" in Thomas' time though, he wouldn't be winning no MVP either.

Dumars gets the edge over Klay... He was definitely a better passer/ball-handler and a better defender, close behind as a scorer (could also shoot) while a better creator for himself, was clutcher...

Aguirre was definitely better than Barnes, no explanation needed.

Dennis was a year shy of winning 2 DPOY's in a row, already playing great, versatile D, already all-defensive 1st; Iguodala's a great defender still but Rodman's above at it.
Ofc that Dre can't even start to mess with Rodman on the boards but on the other hand Dennis just couldn't come to doing what Iggy does as far as passing and handling the rock.
They're at the same level as scorers in the years at stake... Iggy has a better jumper with more range, Dennis was finishing at the rim very well in those years, high FG%, also higher FT% than Andre.
They both have cases to be picked as a role-player above the other, dependign what you'd want.

Laimbeer used to play more as a PF (at least on offense), so I'll "treat" him as the 4 here, with Mahorn as the C.

Bill spaced the floor well, had a pretty good pick-n-pop game with Zeke, had some skill and plenty of size/strength down-low... As far as scoring/shooting he's above Draymond.
Laimbeer also a better rebounder who faced better rebounders (being considerably bigger than Green helps).
Dray brings that offensive versatily in handling the ball while being a nice passer, that Laimbeer just couldn't do.
Lambs was more of a positional defender, let's say, pretty high defensive IQ, good on rotations, not much of a shot-blocker but protected the paint by using his body and also winning charges, tried to put fear into opponents to never go into the paint again... Overall though, defensively, Green just clearly more impactful, better there.
I'd say that this matchup can go either way, tbh.

Bogut vs Mahorn... Rick was definitely tougher, probably stronger, better m2m post-defender while Andrew's a better rebounder, team defender, shot-blocker and overall better defensively.
They were both at similar level in terms of scoring in the years considered... Mahorn was more agile and had a better jumper while being able to shoot at 70+% from the FT-line, and Bogut has a better hook-shot and probably still works better in post, also a better finisher around the rim.
I'd take Bogut as the big for my team.

Vinnie Johnson was a very good spark-plug scorer off the bench, who could do other things too... Microwave's better than either Livingston or Barbosa, but obviously not both of them combined.

Can't tell what David Lee would do if he played more, he was underutilized with the Warriors this year... While John Salley fit perfectly with the Pistons, as an athletic big off the bench bringing shot-blocking, defense, energy, good
rebounding, some scoring too...

John Edwards had been a very good scoring center, and still had plenty of that, very productive scoring-wise for the minutes he was on the court (even their starting center the following season). Buddha had one of the sweetest faders from the post.
Ezeli's more athletic, better rebounder, better shot-blocker... But I'd still take Edwards over him, more proven too.

So, individually, imo:
Curry = Isiah (let's call it a wash)
Dumars > Klay
Aguirre > Barnes
Laimbeer = Green (leaning more towards Dray though probably, as that type of role-player)
Mahorn < Bogut
Rodman = Iggy (depends plenty on what you need/value, although I think Dennis gets the edge)
Vinnie < Livingston + Barbosa
Salley > Lee (considering what they did and the way they were "used", ofc John can't begin to **** with David's prime)
Edwards > Ezeli

^Extremely close there I'd say... Pistons probably with a minor edge.

Chuck Daly a better coach too, while Kerr did his thing but still got to prove himself more.

On the court, either team could win it... Under 80's "rules", can't see GS winning; Pistons' players not coming up with the 3pt-line gives the Warriors' players an "advantage"; if the best Warriors were hot on their 3's they could've definitely take it... Seriously, depends on lots of things.

Feel like the Bad Boys would've won more 7-game series against the Warriors than the other way around, although pretty close I think the Pistons were better overall when everything's considered. Tougher and grittier too, adding to all the talent.

[iamgine]

I like the comparison... Both teams led by a PG, both teams don't have what you'd call a top20 GOAT peak superstar yet both teams very stacked with a deep bench, cohesive with everybody knowing their role. Both had terrific seasons as champs.

Comparing their rotation players...

Some will already say they'd pick Curry over Isiah, other will just give the '**** no' to that... I'mma just call it a wash in terms of impact in order to avoid that whole discussion... They both have areas in which they're above the other; passing/playmaking, slashing/finishing, defense and clutchness for Zeke, while shooting, overall scoring, probably even better rebounding too for Steph.
I'll say that Stephen wouldn't be nearly as "effective" in Thomas' time though, he wouldn't be winning no MVP either.

Dumars gets the edge over Klay... He was definitely a better passer/ball-handler and a better defender, close behind as a scorer (could also shoot) while a better creator for himself, was clutcher...

Aguirre was definitely better than Barnes, no explanation needed.

Dennis was a year shy of winning 2 DPOY's in a row, already playing great, versatile D, already all-defensive 1st; Iguodala's a great defender still but Rodman's above at it.
Ofc that Dre can't even start to mess with Rodman on the boards but on the other hand Dennis just couldn't come to doing what Iggy does as far as passing and handling the rock.
They're at the same level as scorers in the years at stake... Iggy has a better jumper with more range, Dennis was finishing at the rim very well in those years, high FG%, also higher FT% than Andre.
They both have cases to be picked as a role-player above the other, dependign what you'd want.

Laimbeer used to play more as a PF (at least on offense), so I'll "treat" him as the 4 here, with Mahorn as the C.

Bill spaced the floor well, had a pretty good pick-n-pop game with Zeke, had some skill and plenty of size/strength down-low... As far as scoring/shooting he's above Draymond.
Laimbeer also a better rebounder who faced better rebounders (being considerably bigger than Green helps).
Dray brings that offensive versatily in handling the ball while being a nice passer, that Laimbeer just couldn't do.
Lambs was more of a positional defender, let's say, pretty high defensive IQ, good on rotations, not much of a shot-blocker but protected the paint by using his body and also winning charges, tried to put fear into opponents to never go into the paint again... Overall though, defensively, Green just clearly more impactful, better there.
I'd say that this matchup can go either way, tbh.

Bogut vs Mahorn... Rick was definitely tougher, probably stronger, better m2m post-defender while Andrew's a better rebounder, team defender, shot-blocker and overall better defensively.
They were both at similar level in terms of scoring in the years considered... Mahorn was more agile and had a better jumper while being able to shoot at 70+% from the FT-line, and Bogut has a better hook-shot and probably still works better in post, also a better finisher around the rim.
I'd take Bogut as the big for my team.

Vinnie Johnson was a very good spark-plug scorer off the bench, who could do other things too... Microwave's better than either Livingston or Barbosa, but obviously not both of them combined.

Can't tell what David Lee would do if he played more, he was underutilized with the Warriors this year... While John Salley fit perfectly with the Pistons, as an athletic big off the bench bringing shot-blocking, defense, energy, good
rebounding, some scoring too...

John Edwards had been a very good scoring center, and still had plenty of that, very productive scoring-wise for the minutes he was on the court (even their starting center the following season). Buddha had one of the sweetest faders from the post.
Ezeli's more athletic, better rebounder, better shot-blocker... But I'd still take Edwards over him, more proven too.

So, individually, imo:
Curry = Isiah (let's call it a wash)
Dumars > Klay
Aguirre > Barnes
Laimbeer = Green (leaning more towards Dray though probably, as that type of role-player)
Mahorn < Bogut
Rodman = Iggy (depends plenty on what you need/value, although I think Dennis gets the edge)
Vinnie < Livingston + Barbosa
Salley > Lee (considering what they did and the way they were "used", ofc John can't begin to **** with David's prime)
Edwards > Ezeli

^Extremely close there I'd say... Pistons probably with a minor edge.

Chuck Daly a better coach too, while Kerr did his thing but still got to prove himself more.

On the court, either team could win it... Under 80's "rules", can't see GS winning; Pistons' players not coming up with the 3pt-line gives the Warriors' players an "advantage"; if the best Warriors were hot on their 3's they could've definitely take it... Seriously, depends on lots of things.

Feel like the Bad Boys would've won more 7-game series against the Warriors than the other way around, although pretty close I think the Pistons were better overall when everything's considered. Tougher and grittier too, adding to all the talent.
Good analysis but I think the Warriors would take it rather easily (doesn't mean they're the better team overall, just a bad matchup). The Pistons are tough and all but they're not used to playing a three point shooting team. And that takes away from the toughness that Detroit brings to the table. Add to that the Pistons best players are their guards, it just seems to me GSW would be very advantageous in this matchup. GSW players don't even have to be hot, a normal game for them would be enough to win because they would have a lot of wide open shots while Detroit take more contested shots inside.

[OldSchoolBBall]

That Pistons team would have straight MURDERED this GW team. Give me a break. Way more talented, more cohesive as a unit, better coached, better defensively, and most importantly weren't mentally weak.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Good analysis but I think the Warriors would take it rather easily (doesn't mean they're the better team overall, just a bad matchup). The Pistons are tough and all but they're not used to playing a three point shooting team. And that takes away from the toughness that Detroit brings to the table. Add to that the Pistons best players are their guards, it just seems to me GSW would be very advantageous in this matchup. GSW players don't even have to be hot, a normal game for them would be enough to win because they would have a lot of wide open shots while Detroit take more contested shots inside.

That's like saying the Pistons would take it rather easily because the Warriors are not used to that type of physicality and such... Game under 80's "rules" with the Bad Boys playing the same? GSW would've been ****ed...

Don't even get why it would've been so hard to adjust to a 3pt-shooting team... They had major defensive players, were a major defensive team that could bring numerous strategies, adjust to many circumstances... Not hard at all to adjust to that.
Joey D is one of the best defensive SG's ever, Zeke played better D than Curry, Rodman is one of the GOAT defenders, Lambs and Mahorn were good at guarding the pick-n-roll and kept that paint protected in any way, Salley very athletic 6'11 PF shot-blocker, Aguirre could play D, Daly great coach...
Tell me what would be so difficult to adjust to, for those guys, for that team?

Or you could also say that the Warriors take contested jumpers outside while the Pistons work for higher % shots inside while kicking out if needed :rolleyes:
Why the **** would Detroit give them open shots like that, anyways? :wtf:

You're telling me the Pistons never played against great shooters (from anywhere), or great players that were great shooters? :rolleyes:
Even, regarding 3pointers, the league's average 3P% in '89 was 32.3% on 6.6 attempts per game... While vs the Pistons, teams shot 28.5% from 3 (2nd best defensively) on 6.8 3PA's.

Pistons combination of terrific defense, extreme physicality and big-time rebounding would've been a handful for the Warriors, to say the least.

Plus, Bad Boys also had a very good offense, knew how to play as a team and with Isiah, Dumars, Aguirre, Microwave, Laimbeer and Edwards, they had more firepower than the Warriors, wouldn't necessarly say better offense but definitely more overall firepower, coming from more fronts call it... Hard to deal with that.

A situation that's fair would probably be Detroit's players coming up the same but with a 3pt-line and more emphasis on it, let's say, while the series would be played under today's rules... And, while extremely close, I think the Pistons would've won 7-games series more than the other way around.

[Rose'sACL]

That Pistons team would have straight MURDERED this GW team. Give me a break. Way more talented, more cohesive as a unit, better coached, better defensively, and most importantly weren't mentally weak.
This is how you spot a true basketball fan. So much logic in this post.
This is the same logic very intelligent kids use when they say" my dad will beat up your dad because he is my dad"

[OldSchoolBBall]

This is how you spot a true basketball fan. So much logic in this post.
This is the same logic very intelligent kids use when they say" my dad will beat up your dad because he is my dad"

Anyone who saw this GS team look very beatable for much of the series by a team of ragtags and one superstar knows that a far more talented, disciplined, and mentally resilient team would have no trouble handling them. 5-6 games.

[Da_Realist]

Unbelievable how overrated the Warriors are. Et tu, ShaqIsGoat? :cry: And 1987_Lakers you have lost your mind.

The 1989 Pistons are one of the best teams in recent history. They were battle-tested and one of the mentally strongest teams ever. They didn't dominate, they grinded you into submission. They made you tap out. They were focused, did not give up easy points, took pride in their defense and had several guys that could close out games. And they knew how to win.

Golden State is a team built for today with the lack of interior post presence, underemphasis on rebounding and no physicality. Run up and down the court shooting 40 threes a game. Golden State doesn't believe in bad shots. Detroit would have made them pay. Bum ass Cleveland just exposed them. The only reason Cleveland didn't beat them outright is because they wore down with no Kyrie.

[iamgine]

That's like saying the Pistons would take it rather easily because the Warriors are not used to that type of physicality and such... Game under 80's "rules" with the Bad Boys playing the same? GSW would've been ****ed...

Don't even get why it would be so hard to adjust to a 3pt-shooting team... They had major defensive players, were a major defensive team that could bring numerous strategies, adjust to many circumstances... Not hard at all to adjust to that.
Joey D is one of the best defensive SG's ever, Zeke played better D than Curry, Rodman is one of the GOAT defenders, Lambs and Mahorn were good at guarding the pick-n-roll and kept that paint protected in any way, Salley very athletic 6'11 PF shot-blocker, Aguirre could play D, Daly great coach...
Tell me what would be so difficult to adjust to, for those guys, for that team?

Or you could also say that the Warriors take contest jumpers outside while the Pistons work for higher % shots inside while kicking out if needed :rolleyes:
Why the **** would Detroit give them open shots like that, anyways? :wtf:

You're telling me the Pistons never played against great shooters (from anywhere), or great players that were great shooters? :rolleyes:
Even, regarding 3pointers, the league's average 3P% in '89 was 32.3% on 6.6 attempts per game... While vs the Pistons, teams shot 28.5% from 3 (2nd best defensively) on 6.8 3PA's.

Pistons combination of terrific defense, extreme physicality and big-time rebounding would've been a handful for the Warriors, to say the least.

Plus, Bad Boys also had a very good offense, knew how to play as a team and with Isiah, Dumars, Aguirre, Microwave, Laimbeer and Edwards, they had more firepower than the Warriors, wouldn't necessarly say better offense but definitely more overall firepower, coming from more fronts call it... Hard to deal with that.

A situation that's fair would probably be Detroit's players coming up the same but with a 3pt-line and more emphasis on it, let's say, while the series would be played under today's rules... And, while extremely close, I think the Pistons would've won 7-games series more than the other way around.
I don't think you could just come up and execute new defensive schemes on the spot. Pistons never faced this kind of team before while GSW has encountered offensive plays that Pistons ran plenty of times. Defense need to be...practiced. This is not pick up basketball. Pistons certainly had the personnel like any great team would but they would get slaughtered on threes. Slaughtered. Pistons physicality would work much better on, say, '00 Lakers.

Also, GSW is not lacking in physicality and defense themselves. Bogut, Green, Iguodala, Ezeli are big and ready to throw down protecting the rim. These are not quire boys. As I said, just a bad matchup, not because GSW is the better team.

[OldSchoolBBall]

I don't think you could just come up and execute new defensive schemes on the spot. Pistons never faced this kind of team before while GSW has encountered offensive plays that Pistons ran plenty of times. Defense need to be...practiced.

Err, no they haven't. Those Pistons ran various off ball action, down screens and weaves that GS has never encountered simply because every team today P&R's to death off their star player. You should do yourself a favor and watch some mid-late 80's basketball. The sets they ran were COMPLETELY different than the ones today, and weren't reducible to "throw it into the post."

[iamgine]

Err, no they haven't. Those Pistons ran various off ball action, down screens and weaves that GS has never encountered simply because every team today P&R's to death off their star player. You should do yourself a favor and watch some mid-late 80's basketball. The sets they ran were COMPLETELY different than the ones today, and weren't reducible to "throw it into the post."
You think all teams today only faced P&R? :wtf:

[scandisk_]

Anyone who saw this GS team look very beatable for much of the series by a team of ragtags and one superstar knows that a far more talented, disciplined, and mentally resilient team would have no trouble handling them. 5-6 games.

They would probably match well with 89 detroit after a few seasons. But today? nah. Lebron and co. really worked them well.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Unbelievable how overrated the Warriors are. Et tu, ShaqIsGoat? :cry: And 1987_Lakers you have lost your mind.

The 1989 Pistons are one of the best teams in recent history. They were battle-tested and one of the mentally strongest teams ever. They didn't dominate, they grinded you into submission. They made you tap out. They were focused, did not give up easy points, took pride in their defense and had several guys that could close out games. And they knew how to win.

Golden State is a team built for today with the lack of interior post presence, underemphasis on rebounding and no physicality. Run up and down the court shooting 40 threes a game. Golden State doesn't believe in bad shots. Detroit would have made them pay. Bum ass Cleveland just exposed them. The only reason Cleveland didn't beat them outright is because they wore down with no Kyrie.

Don't think I've overrated them, tbh.

I said the Bad Boys would've beaten them, at least more than the other way around...
I said that calling them top10 all-time is a HUGE stretch...
I said that plenty of teams on that list there would've beaten them, all or almost all of that top10 would've done it, plus more than 3 teams not on that top10, listed there...

[Da_Realist]

Don't think I've overrated them, tbh.

I said the Bad Boys would've beaten them, at least more than the other way around...
I said that calling them top10 all-time is a HUGE stretch...
I said that plenty of teams on that list there would've beaten them, all or almost all of that top10 would've done it, plus more than 3 teams not on that top10, listed there...

You're right. I should have read your comment more closely. :hammerhead:

[SHAQisGOAT]

I don't think you could just come up and execute new defensive schemes on the spot. Pistons never faced this kind of team before while GSW has encountered offensive plays that Pistons ran plenty of times. Defense need to be...practiced. This is not pick up basketball. Pistons certainly had the personnel like any great team would but they would get slaughtered on threes. Slaughtered. Pistons physicality would work much better on, say, '00 Lakers.

Also, GSW is not lacking in physicality and defense themselves. Bogut, Green, Iguodala, Ezeli are big and ready to throw down protecting the rim. These are not quire boys. As I said, just a bad matchup, not because GSW is the better team.

On the spot? So they wouldn't even been able to prepare for them or anything? :rolleyes:
HEAVILY disagree with all of that and already said why.

Pistons had everything to greatly deal with all the 3pt-shooting, plus the Warriors also would've had to deal with major physicality inside, big-time paint attacking and some post-up threats, plus the ball swinging and Detroit also had guys to knock down shots.

Pistons ran plenty of plays, had some strategies rarely seen in this era, too... Don't get what that would change much if you're prepared for it.

Never said they can't get physical, never said they're not great or not great defensively but they've never seen that type of physicality, no sir.

I'm also considering rebounding, inside play and such, but talking much more about Golden State's best player(s), their best offensive threat(s)...
Steph plays in a guard-oriented league, any form of handchecking is long gone, easier to drive and score in the paint plenty also due to much less physicality, nowadays you can't even touch a shooter, regular fouls back then are now flagrants, dribbling "rules" are looser...
Why do you think little men such as Isiah, Price, KJ, Stockton, ect, never even came close to winning MVP? Not just because of the tremendous superstar competition on top (even though that also matters much). Why do you think plenty of them didn't even last long in the league?
Steph's not better (at least much better than some) than some of those guys, he's not more durable or tougher...

Like I've said, game under 80's "rules" and GS would've been ****ed up...
While the Bad Boys could relatively easily adjust to all the 3pt-shooting, not even going to get into that they didn't come up with the 3pt-line while not playing in 3pt-era.

One more time, let's not act like those Pistons never played against great shooters or great players who were great shooters, let's not act like they never even faced 3pt-threats :rolleyes:
Also, 3pt-play wasn't nearly close to nowadays but also showed they were probably the best team at "defending it" during those times.

And again, Pistons had more firepower on more fronts (not saying better offense), people will neglect that though.
Zeke was close behind Curry as a scorer, Dumars was close behind Klay, and then Aguirre was easily a better scorer than Barnes, Microwave better than any guard on GS's bench, Laimbeer better scorer than Draymond. Lee didn't play much, wasn't the same, underutilized so can't say he scored way more/better than Salley. I'd call Iggy a better scorer than Rodman even at the years given but Pistons also had Edwards, a prett good scoring C, legit post-up threat.
You mention the shooting and everything but don't even talked about any of that^.

[OldSchoolBBall]

The Warrior aren't even a top 20 team of all time. Teams I'd easily take over them in a 7 game series:

At least 1-2 of Russell's Celtics teams
'71 Bucks
'72 Lakers
'80 Lakers
'83 Sixers
'84-'86 Celtics
'85-'88 Lakers
'88-'91 Pistons
'91 and '92 Blazers
'93 Knicks
'93 Suns
'90-'93 and '96-'98 Bulls
'00-'03 Lakers
'04 Pistons
'99, '03, '05, '13 and '14 Spurs
'12 and '13 Heat

Hell, I'd probably take the Durant/Westbrook/Harden Thunder over them in a series. So maybe they crack the top 20 teams of all time. Maybe. Even if you disagree with a few of the teams up there, most of them are no-brainers, and there are like 25+ teams listed there.

[iamgine]

On the spot? So they wouldn't even been able to prepare for them or anything? :rolleyes:
HEAVILY disagree with all of that and already said why.

Pistons had everything to greatly deal with all the 3pt-shooting, plus the Warriors also would've had to deal with major physicality inside, big-time paint attacking and some post-up threats, plus the ball swinging and Detroit also had guys to knock down shots.

Pistons ran plenty of plays, had some strategies rarely seen in this era, too... Don't get what that would change much if you're prepared for it.

Never said they can't get physical, never said they're not great or not great defensively but they've never seen that type of physicality, no sir.

I'm also considering rebounding, inside play and such, but talking much more about Golden State's best player(s), their best offensive threat(s)...
Steph plays in a guard-oriented league, any form of handchecking is long gone, easier to drive and score in the paint plenty also due to much less physicality, nowadays you can't even touch a shooter, regular fouls back then are now flagrants, dribbling "rules" are looser...
Why do you think little men such as Isiah, Price, KJ, Stockton, ect, never even came close to winning MVP? Not just because of the tremendous superstar competition on top (even though that also matters much). Why do you think plenty of them didn't even last long in the league?
Steph's not better (at least much better than some) than some of those guys, he's not more durable or tougher...

Like I've said, game under 80's "rules" and GS would've been ****ed up...
While the Bad Boys could relatively easily adjust to all the 3pt-shooting, not even going to get into that they didn't come up with the 3pt-line while not playing in 3pt-era.

One more time, let's not act like those Pistons never played against great shooters or great players who were great shooters, let's not act like they never even faced 3pt-threats :rolleyes:
Also, 3pt-play wasn't nearly close to nowadays but also showed they were probably the best team at "defending it" during those times.

And again, Pistons had more firepower on more fronts (not saying better offense), people will neglect that though.
Zeke was close behind Curry as a scorer, Dumars was close behind Klay, and then Aguirre was easily a better scorer than Barnes, Microwave better than any guard on GS's bench, Laimbeer better scorer than Draymond. Lee didn't play much, wasn't the same, underutilized so can't say he scored way more/better than Salley. I'd call Iggy a better scorer than Rodman even at the years given but Pistons also had Edwards, a prett good scoring C, legit post-up threat.
You mention the shooting and everything but don't even talked about any of that^.

It's okay, we just disagree. I've already outlined the reasons and could expand more but we just see it completely different way and that's...okay.

[juju151111]

The Warrior aren't even a top 20 team of all time. Teams I'd easily take over them in a 7 game series:

At least 1-2 of Russell's Celtics teams
'71 Bucks
'72 Lakers
'80 Lakers
'83 Sixers
'84-'86 Celtics
'85-'88 Lakers
'88-'91 Pistons
'91 and '92 Blazers
'93 Knicks
'93 Suns
'90-'93 and '96-'98 Bulls
'00-'03 Lakers
'04 Pistons
'99, '03, '05, '13 and '14 Spurs
'12 and '13 Heat

Hell, I'd probably take the Durant/Westbrook/Harden Thunder over them in a series. So maybe they crack the top 20 teams of all time. Maybe. Even if you disagree with a few of the teams up there, most of them are no-brainers, and there are like 25+ teams listed there.
you are underrating the Warriors. They were number 1 in offense and defense. They have great coaches and they record in only below the Bulls all-time countingregular seasoand playoffs.

[OldSchoolBBall]

you are underrating the Warriors. They were number 1 in offense and defense. They have great coaches and they record in only below the Bulls all-time countingregular seasoand playoffs.

I'm not underrating them - I'm basing it off what I saw from them this series. They also looked beatable fairly often against the Grizzlies until Tony Allen got injured. They simply don't compare to at least 20 of the teams I listed. Their offensive/defensive rank means nothing when they got exposed against a shorthanded Cavs team and a physical Grizzlies team with good interior play (which most of the teams I listed have).

People get caught up in the stats and aren't going by their level of play on the court in these playoffs and especially the Finals. They just aren't on that level mentally and as a unit.

[Legends66NBA7]

This Warriors team isn't getting swept or destroyed by anybody all-time. You can say they can be beaten, but people just have it out for them right now.

I wonder if they don't repeat next season (or win another again with this core), people will just write them off as a fluke and will continue underrate them.

[jayfan]

The Warrior aren't even a top 20 team of all time. Teams I'd easily take over them in a 7 game series:

At least 1-2 of Russell's Celtics teams
'71 Bucks
'72 Lakers
'80 Lakers
'83 Sixers
'84-'86 Celtics
'85-'88 Lakers
'88-'91 Pistons
'91 and '92 Blazers
'93 Knicks
'93 Suns
'90-'93 and '96-'98 Bulls
'00-'03 Lakers
'04 Pistons
'99, '03, '05, '13 and '14 Spurs
'12 and '13 Heat


I might take those early 80's Bucks teams over them, as well.



.

[1987_Lakers]

The Warrior aren't even a top 20 team of all time. Teams I'd easily take over them in a 7 game series:

At least 1-2 of Russell's Celtics teams
'71 Bucks
'72 Lakers
'80 Lakers
'83 Sixers
'84-'86 Celtics
'85-'88 Lakers
'88-'91 Pistons
'91 and '92 Blazers
'93 Knicks
'93 Suns
'90-'93 and '96-'98 Bulls
'00-'03 Lakers
'04 Pistons
'99, '03, '05, '13 and '14 Spurs
'12 and '13 Heat

Hell, I'd probably take the Durant/Westbrook/Harden Thunder over them in a series. So maybe they crack the top 20 teams of all time. Maybe. Even if you disagree with a few of the teams up there, most of them are no-brainers, and there are like 25+ teams listed there.

Dude, come on. This just shows your Jordan homerism. You're telling me the '91 Pistons who were on the brink of demise and barley won 50 games during the regular season were beating this Warriors team?

[OldSchoolBBall]

Dude, come on. This just shows your Jordan homerism. You're telling me the '91 Pistons who were on the brink of demise and barley won 50 games during the regular season were beating this Warriors team?

Yes, I think they do.

But like I said, even if you take issue with half a dozen teams on there, that still leaves 20+ teams the Warriors are not better than. The '93 Knicks defense would SUFFOCATE the Warriors going by what Cleveland - nowhere near as good a defensive team - did to them. The Suns just had too much firepower for GS imo plus more balanced inside/out play. Ditto the Blazers - too much talent 1-7.

[ArbitraryWater]

GSW has no business being up there among the GOAT teams, when everyone can see that a healthy Cavs team would have whopped that ass, and been the 2015 Champion. So if you wanna include anyone from this year, then pick the right team.

[Heavincent]

GSW has no business being up there among the GOAT teams, when everyone can see that a healthy Cavs team would have whopped that ass, and been the 2015 Champion. So if you wanna include anyone from this year, then pick the right team.

I thought you were supposed to leave ISH forever if the Warriors won? :oldlol:

lol at the salt.

http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/5581bd5ceab8ea4b2653bd28-1200-900/andre-iguodala-5.jpg

https://c.o0bg.com/rf/image_960w/Boston/2011-2020/2015/06/17/BostonGlobe.com/Sports/Images/04803803.jpg

[Rocketswin2013]

This Warriors team isn't getting swept or destroyed by anybody all-time. You can say they can be beaten, but people just have it out for them right now.

I wonder if they don't repeat next season (or win another again with this core), people will just write them off as a fluke and will continue underrate them.
I could see the '01 Lakers blowing them out.

[1987_Lakers]

Yes, I think they do.

But like I said, even if you take issue with half a dozen teams on there, that still leaves 20+ teams the Warriors are not better than. The '93 Knicks defense would SUFFOCATE the Warriors going by what Cleveland - nowhere near as good a defensive team - did to them. The Suns just had too much firepower for GS imo plus more balanced inside/out play. Ditto the Blazers - too much talent 1-7.


Sorry, your reasonings are pretty weak.

That Knicks team was pretty bad offensively, they had a streaky John Starks as their 2nd option. They struggled against Chicago without Jordan, lost to the Pacers who weren't really that talented.

Suns had alot of fire power, but Warriors had the #2 offense this year, and Phoenix had no where near the defense or depth of the Warriors. Warriors were the more balanced overall team.

Blazers too much talent 1-7? Warriors could go 11 deep, yes 11 deep.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Sorry, your reasonings are pretty weak.

That Knicks team was pretty bad offensively, they had a streaky John Starks as their 2nd option. They struggled against Chicago without Jordan, lost to the Pacers who weren't really that talented.

Suns had alot of fire power, but Warriors had the #2 offense this year, and Phoenix had no where near the defense or depth of the Warriors. Warriors were the more balanced overall team.

Blazers too much talent 1-7? Warriors could go 11 deep, yes 11 deep.

The '93 Knicks aren't the '94 Knicks.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

It honestly depends on the rules. With handchecking and physical play circa early 90s ball, I could see the Warriors and Knicks series being one of the greatest ever. The Knicks players would be used to the physical play, so that would give them some advantage.

And under today's rules, vice versa.

Awesome matchup regardless

[1987_Lakers]

The '93 Knicks aren't the '94 Knicks.

Pretty much the same team bud.

[Lakers Legend#32]

'89 Pistons would not even won the Finals if Magic and Byron Scott were not injured and could not play.