PDA

View Full Version : Is 73-9 will still be relevant in the history books if haren upsets them??



snipes12
04-22-2016, 09:47 AM
the will be easily be forgotten .. Although they have a nice run

Uncle Drew
04-22-2016, 09:50 AM
It will never be forgotten. It's just a useless record if they don't win it all.

navy
04-22-2016, 09:50 AM
Yes. Not sure why people try to rewrite history.

The Warriors have a built in excuse anyways

Nilocon165
04-22-2016, 09:50 AM
Probably. Can't be the greatest team of all time if you don't win it all. Especially if you lose in the first round.

That's not happening though

Frenetic
04-22-2016, 09:54 AM
can't believe they dropped a game to the worst team in the playoffs. they should've been aiming for 15-0. take curry off the bench now and go 15-1.

Psileas
04-22-2016, 10:03 AM
It will be certainly relevant when it comes to evaluating Harden's career, although there will always exist Curry's absense argument.

It probably won't be relevant when it comes to mentioning the Warriors among the GOAT teams. The '73 Celtics had posted a 68-14 record, which had stood as the 3rd greatest ever up to 1995, yet, I haven't seen anyone putting them among the GOAT teams - and they lost in the Conf.Finals, to the stacked Knicks, with an injured Havlicek who couldn't provide much after the first couple of games. Many don't even know that there had ever existed such a dominant team that failed to win it all. If Havlicek was healthy, maybe the Celtics would be champions again. Same would be said for the Warriors.

LAZERUSS
04-22-2016, 10:04 AM
It will be certainly relevant when it comes to evaluating Harden's career, although there will always exist Curry's absense argument.

It probably won't be relevant when it comes to mentioning the Warriors among the GOAT teams. The '73 Celtics had posted a 68-14 record, which had stood as the 3rd greatest ever up to 1995, yet, I haven't seen anyone putting them among the GOAT teams - and they lost in the Conf.Finals, to the stacked Knicks, with an injured Havlicek who couldn't provide much after the first couple of games. Many don't even know that there had ever existed such a dominant team that failed to win it all. If Havlicek was healthy, maybe the Celtics would be champions again. Same would be said for the Warriors.

Not only that, but that Celtic team won a title the very next year, and followed it up with another one a couple of years later.

ScalsFan21
04-22-2016, 10:05 AM
can't believe they dropped a game to the worst team in the playoffs. they should've been aiming for 15-0. take curry off the bench now and go 15-1.

16-1 you mean. So they can still technically have the best playoff run percentage along with best regular season record.

Sarcastic
04-22-2016, 10:06 AM
As relevant as the 16-0 Patriots.

IllegalD
04-22-2016, 10:09 AM
If they don't win it it'll go down as one of the biggest letdowns/chokejobs in sports history, up there with the 2008 Patriots or the 2001 Mariners. (ESPECIALLY if they lose to the Rockets in the FIRST round :roll: )

Except 100x times worse because of all the hype and global attention these Warriors have gotten. So no one will ever forget what a letdown it is.

Any Warriors fans that think otherwise is just in hardcore denial and trying to spin a positive narrative where there would be none. And no, Curry's ankle issues aren't an excuse. Unless he's literally incapable of suiting up and being on an active list (like a serious season ending injury), the expectations is that he should suck it up and find a way to play great despite his limitations, like other all time greats have done.

GOATJono
04-22-2016, 10:10 AM
Can't lose to Haren, anyone but defensive liability Haren.

r15mohd
04-22-2016, 10:12 AM
As relevant as the 16-0 Patriots.


this! :lol

#AnyoneButBoston

Marchesk
04-22-2016, 10:13 AM
As relevant as the 16-0 Patriots.

But TBH that Patriots team is more memorable than half the SB winners.

LAZERUSS
04-22-2016, 10:22 AM
But TBH that Patriots team is more memorable than half the SB winners.

And a miraculous Tyree catch away from 19-0.

SouBeachTalents
04-22-2016, 10:45 AM
But TBH that Patriots team is more memorable than half the SB winners.

People may disagree, but the '07 Pats are imo easily one of the 10 most well known NFL teams of all time, surpassed only by the likes of the '72 Dolphins & '85 Bears

ClipperRevival
04-22-2016, 10:48 AM
As relevant as the 16-0 Patriots.

This.

Sarcastic
04-22-2016, 10:50 AM
But TBH that Patriots team is more memorable than half the SB winners.

I never said the Patriots were irrelevant. But they're always known as the greatest team to come up short.

Sarcastic
04-22-2016, 10:52 AM
And a miraculous Tyree catch away from 19-0.


If you wanna play that card, the 2001 Pats are one BS tuck rule blown call from winning their first one.

Legends66NBA7
04-22-2016, 11:01 AM
And a miraculous Tyree catch away from 19-0.

I would say their most recent Super Bowl win is a mirror trade off of their 07 team.

Malcolm Butler made an amazing play at the 1 yardine. What's crazy is that Jermaine Kearse made a David Tyree-esque catch plays before that. Thought history was repeating itself.

ClipperRevival
04-22-2016, 11:03 AM
If you wanna play that card, the 2001 Pats are one BS tuck rule blown call from winning their first one.

You can do this for so many champions in any sport. It is what it is. Either get it done or come up short.

tmacattack33
04-22-2016, 11:15 AM
If they lose because Curry is out, then the record is still cool to me.

If they lose in any round with Curry playing, then they just lost a seven game series when healthy, which means they were not the better team. Which obviously means they are not the best team of all-time.

tmacattack33
04-22-2016, 11:22 AM
This (it will be as relevant as the Patriots 16-0).

It will be even less impressive than that.

The Patriots lost one very close game to the Giants. The argument can still easily be made that they were a better team than those Giants.

If the Warriors lose a 7 game series, this will likely not be due to luck, and it will mean that the Warriors were indeed the worse team. Which would obviously mean they aren't the best team ever.





Not to mention that the NFL regular season is very intense, as each game matters. The NBA regular season is a joke, and is not played at 100% effort.

LAZERUSS
04-22-2016, 11:23 AM
If you wanna play that card, the 2001 Pats are one BS tuck rule blown call from winning their first one.

I was just pointing out that it took a miraculous catch to keep the '07 Pats from going 19-0.

I know that there have been many blown calls in big games. And BTW, I am not a Pats fan.

Kiddlovesnets
04-22-2016, 11:39 AM
Well they wont be forgotten, most likely will be remembered as the greatest underachiever and joke in NBA playoffs history, only Patriots' 18-1 NFL season is comparable.
:lol

LAZERUSS
04-22-2016, 11:42 AM
It will be certainly relevant when it comes to evaluating Harden's career, although there will always exist Curry's absense argument.

It probably won't be relevant when it comes to mentioning the Warriors among the GOAT teams. The '73 Celtics had posted a 68-14 record, which had stood as the 3rd greatest ever up to 1995, yet, I haven't seen anyone putting them among the GOAT teams - and they lost in the Conf.Finals, to the stacked Knicks, with an injured Havlicek who couldn't provide much after the first couple of games. Many don't even know that there had ever existed such a dominant team that failed to win it all. If Havlicek was healthy, maybe the Celtics would be champions again. Same would be said for the Warriors.

The '73 Knicks were one of the most stacked teams in NBA history. SIX HOFers.

Marchesk
04-22-2016, 11:44 AM
The Payton/Kemp Sonics team that lost to Denver in the first round with a #1 seed may have cost them a title. They consistently beat Houston back then, and Jordan was playing baseball.

That was bad.

Draz
04-22-2016, 12:41 PM
They'll be irrelevant. As much as I like them, it's win it all or nothing

dazzer87
04-22-2016, 01:22 PM
its 2-1
Wurzburg , Germany

I know you are
04-22-2016, 01:38 PM
Rockets won't win. If they do, it will be the 73 win team that unfortunately had an injury to their MVP and then lost.

AirBonner
04-22-2016, 02:16 PM
It will be even less impressive than that.

The Patriots lost one very close game to the Giants. The argument can still easily be made that they were a better team than those Giants.

If the Warriors lose a 7 game series, this will likely not be due to luck, and it will mean that the Warriors were indeed the worse team. Which would obviously mean they aren't the best team ever.




Not to mention that the NFL regular season is very intense, as each game matters. The NBA regular season is a joke, and is not played at 100% effort.
This. Football is way more evenly matched then basketball. You can't even compare the two scenarios.