Printable View
Baller234 spends the day yesterday desperately trying to argue that because the 2018 Warriors went 7 games against the 65 win Houston team in the playoffs, that means the 2017 Warriors were also a beatable team.
I and many other posters laughed at this, but baller234 made a couple of awful arguments and is trying to pretzel his way around this topic.
Are the 2017 Warriors the same team as the 2018 Warriors?
Also, Full Court is banned for like the 7th time in 4 months. What a rat. :lol
lol okay buddy.
if you're supposed to be the goat and you have kyrie irving and kevin love as teammates, you always have a chance. i don't care what team you're playing. same applies to having d-wade and chris bosh as teammates.
i couldn't imagine jordan in his prime having two all-star caliber teammates and his fans saying "i dunno guys that other team was just too good..."
They want to see MJ as some demi god that could not possibly be taken down by any team.
Reality is sometimes less exciting.
[QUOTE=Baller234;14839709]lol okay buddy.
if you're supposed to be the goat and you have kyrie irving and kevin love as teammates, you always have a chance. i don't care what team you're playing. same applies to having d-wade and chris bosh as teammates.
i couldn't imagine jordan in his prime having two all-star caliber teammates and his fans saying "i dunno guys that other team was just too good..."[/QUOTE]
You said he should have been expected to win, not that he had a chance, which is two completely different arguments and borders on semantics. The fact he had a great Finals and still lost in 5 should tell you that was an extremely uphill battle for them to win.
I can assure you, had the Jazz run it back in '98 with Durant, which is literally what happened in 2017, the Bulls ain't winning :lol
Baller hates LeBron cuz he’s a liberal. That’s all this is about.
[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14839711]You said he should have been expected to win, not that he had a chance, which is two completely different arguments and borders on semantics. The fact he had a great Finals and still lost in 5 should tell you that was an extremely uphill battle for them to win.
I can assure you, had the Jazz run it back in '98 with Durant, which is literally what happened in 2017, the Bulls ain't winning :lol[/QUOTE]
Sloan is still getting out coached. Malone is still playing his worst ball when it matters most. Stockton is still too unselfish
Imagine adding Kevin Durant to the 1997 Utah Jazz and expecting Jordan and Co to beat them.
[QUOTE=Baller234;14839709]lol okay buddy.
if you're supposed to be the goat and you have kyrie irving and kevin love as teammates, you always have a chance. i don't care what team you're playing. same applies to having d-wade and chris bosh as teammates.
i couldn't imagine jordan in his prime having two all-star caliber teammates and his fans saying "i dunno guys that other team was just too good..."[/QUOTE]
Jordan in his prime lost to the Detroit Pistons 3 years in a row while the Pistons only had 1 player make the all-nba team those 3 years, a 3rd team all-nba selection Joe Dumars.
"if you're supposed to be the goat" ??
2017 Warriors would have beaten any team in history, including any of MJ's Bulls teams. I'll leave it at that.
[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14839711]You said he should have been expected to win, not that he had a chance, which is two completely different arguments and borders on semantics. [B]The fact he had a great Finals and still lost in 5 should tell you that was an extremely uphill battle for them to win.[/B]
I can assure you, had the Jazz run it back in '98 with Durant, which is literally what happened in 2017, the Bulls ain't winning :lol[/QUOTE]
you may be right about all of this. yes if the jazz added another top tier caliber scorer, they probably could have beaten the bulls. do the bulls get smoked 4-1? i don't know. personally i think the bulls still would have had a chance. they beat teams with multiple scorers before. the 93 suns were basically the warriors of their day. the bulls were always elite defensively, and the other team never had an answer for jordan.
fact is whenever lebron's teams fall short, according to you guys it is always a reflection of the roster and never a reflection of lebron. apparently lebron's only job is to fill the stat sheet and aim for a triple double. so long as he does that or comes close to doing that, he can never be responsible for his team losing.
fact of the matter is that lebron lost playing on great teams multiple times.
[QUOTE=8Ball;14839715]Jordan in his prime lost to the Detroit Pistons 3 years in a row while the Pistons only had 1 player make the all-nba team those 3 years, a 3rd team all-nba selection Joe Dumars.
"if you're supposed to be the goat" ??[/QUOTE]
if i am giving lebron a pass for the 07 finals, you should be able to give jordan a pass for playing a championship caliber pistons team with a rookie scottie pippen.
pippen wasn't even considered an all-star until 1990.
[QUOTE=Baller234;14839719]if i am giving lebron a pass for the 07 finals, you should be able to give jordan a pass for playing a championship caliber pistons team with a rookie scottie pippen.
pippen wasn't even considered an all-star until 1990.[/QUOTE]
Of course I give him a pass for that, because I don't hold him to impossible standards like you do Bran. I was flipping the logic on you.
[QUOTE=8Ball;14839720]Of course I give him a pass for that, because I don't hold him to impossible standards like you do Bran. I was flipping the logic on you.[/QUOTE]
it's impossible to expect lebron to win when has a kyrive irving and kevin love as teammates?
what about d-wade and chris bosh?
Why couldn't Jordan as a 1st team all-nba beat the Pistons for 3 years when they had zero all-nba players for 2/3 of those years?
"if you're supposed to be the goat" you should be able to beat a team with no all-nba players during those years.
I can make up random expectations as well. It's not so fun is it?
2017 Warriors are much better and in strong contention to be the GOAT teams.
2018 Warriors are just a good team. I get when people rank them high because of the same core of players but they were a very clear step below.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14839716]2017 Warriors would have beaten any team in history, including any of MJ's Bulls teams. I'll leave it at that.[/QUOTE]
I think if you give the '86 Celtics a season to adapt to the modern era they'd have a chance. Other than that I don't think any team possesses the raw talent and shooting capability to stand a chance.
I firmly believe that Jordan is the better player between him and Lebron, but if someone believes the Cavs should've won '17 or any of Jordan's Bullsteams could've they're retarded.
[QUOTE=Baller234;14839709]lol okay buddy.
if you're supposed to be the goat and you have kyrie irving and kevin love as teammates, you always have a chance. i don't care what team you're playing. same applies to having d-wade and chris bosh as teammates.
i couldn't imagine jordan in his prime having two all-star caliber teammates and his fans saying "i dunno guys that other team was just too good..."[/QUOTE]
LeBron's Finals appearances with Kyrie and Love was his 5th, 6th and 7th consecutive appearances.
Twice MJ had chances to make it 4 consecutive appearances but chose to walk away both times and retire due to exhaustion.
No. The 2017 Warriors are one of the five best teams I’ve ever seen in real time in my life.
Which if anyone cares:
1993 Bulls
1996 Bulls
1997 Bulls
2001 Lakers
2017 Warriors
2017 GSW were clicking on all cylinders, great chemistry, great vibes, played harmoniously, motivated.
But not for meaningless shit like regular season record ala 2016.
The 2018 team was a little more flawed and then obviously 2019 they had problems with chemistry due to Draymond and Kevin Durant conflict.
And to the Michael Jordan / Kobe hating dude, 1987 Lakers …
The Bulls could beat the 2017 Warriors. Basketball is a game of matchups, and what Chicago brings to the table strength wise would give them issue.
If they struggled with the Chris Paul and James Harden Rockets and the 2019 Raptors. Even if those version of the Warriors are slightly inferior to the 2017 one, Chicago, particularly given what type of rules set you’re playing by. Whether it’s the actual sport of basketball, or the modern loose entertainment rules, either way they could give them issue. The Bulls greatest strengths were perimeter defense. And DrAPEmond would be mind****ed into oblivion by Dennis Rodman. But would be a great matchup.
2001 Lakers would give them issue and could beat them too. Because there is no solution with that extra small ball for Shaq. And by that point, Kobe Bryant was the top three to top five player in the league and a co-Alpha. That’s why they were so absurdly dominant. A legitimate two headed monster with 2 of the 3 best players in the league. Shaq / Duncan / Kobe were the best players in the game. Them after them KG / AI / Kidd at that time. 2001 Lakers could beat those 2017 Warriors.
The 2017 Cavs were a three all star super team and tremendously offensively talented, but they don’t bring anything to the table that could slow the Warriors strengths down or offer an alternative they can’t stop.
It’s chess not checkers.
Those Cavs don’t have the perimeter defense Jordan w/ Pippen’s Bulls had. And they don’t have utter dominance down low that the 2001 Lakers had.
Stopped making passive aggressive and thinly veiled excuses for LeBron. He didn’t face unanimously the best team of all time. They are one of the best. But definitely not definitive. The Cavaliers, if they played an ounce of defense, could’ve made that series competitive.
They should’ve won game three, but LeBron was too pussified league to stay on Kevin Durant on a weak ass screen, and go over the top to contest KD’s jumper or dribble penetration, and instead switched off and let JR Smith to hang out to dry who didn’t have the requisite size to guard Kevin Durant.
[QUOTE=8Ball;14839726]Why couldn't Jordan as a 1st team all-nba beat the Pistons for 3 years when they had zero all-nba players for 2/3 of those years?
"if you're supposed to be the goat" you should be able to beat a team with no all-nba players during those years.
I can make up random expectations as well. It's not so fun is it?[/QUOTE]
if that's the argument you want to hang your hat on... which is the the bulls should have stood a better chance against the bad boy pistons because technically the pistons didn't have any players who were all-nba that year... i can rest easy knowing that you're totally full of shit.
that's not the same as lebron being fully equipped with an all-star supporting cast and coming up short on multiple occasions.
The Bad Boy Pistons were better than Magic’s Lakers and Bird’s Celtics.
I hate to break it to people … they were loaded. Don’t get confused at strictly the names Magic and Bird. Daley’s Pistons teams were better.
They had at the time, either the best point guard of all time or arguably the best point guard of all time, now third, after Magic and Steph Curry in Isiah Thomas. Who would essentially be like, combining, Chris Paul and Kyrie Irving.
Joe Dumars was a perennial All-Star shooting guard, fantastic defensively, and then they had Dennis Rodman, who when he was an athletic thin small forward, has a legit argument for the best perimeter defender, and rebounder of all time. And then they had guys like the microwave Vinny Johnson, scoring 20 off the bench?
The Bad Boy Pistons were absurd. They also got hosed out of a three peat.
[QUOTE=WhiteKyrie;14839750]The Bad Boy Pistons were better than Magic’s Lakers and Bird’s Celtics.
I hate to break it to people … they were loaded. Don’t get confused at strictly the names Magic and Bird. Daley’s Pistons teams were better.
They had at the time, either the best point guard of all time or arguably the best point guard of all time, now third, after Magic and Steph Curry in Isiah Thomas. Who would essentially be like, combining, Chris Paul and Kyrie Irving.
Joe Dumars was a perennial All-Star shooting guard, fantastic defensively, and then they had Dennis Rodman, who when he was an athletic thin small forward, has a legit argument for the best perimeter defender, and rebounder of all time. And then they had guys like the microwave Vinny Johnson, scoring 20 off the bench?
The Bad Boy Pistons were absurd. They also got hosed out of a three peat.[/QUOTE]
Don't forget Bill Laimbeer who was a very good two-way big man in his own right and made 4 all-star games.
Or Mark Aguirre who came over from Dallas where he put up huge scoring numbers and made 3 all-star games.
Or Rick Mahorn who was an enforcer big basically Charles Oakley light.
Or John Salley who was their 9th man but could contribute on both ends.
The Bad Boy Pistons didn't have any superstars but they had like 9 guys who were at least close to all-star level. They legit might be the deepest team in NBA history.
By the way I'm really surprised you have the 1993 Bulls in your top 5. They were the worst Bulls title team LOL.
[QUOTE=Baller234;14839744]if that's the argument you want to hang your hat on... which is the the bulls should have stood a better chance against the bad boy pistons because technically the pistons didn't have any players who were all-nba that year... i can rest easy knowing that you're totally full of shit.
that's not the same as lebron being fully equipped with an all-star supporting cast and coming up short on multiple occasions.[/QUOTE]
Looks like not a single soul on this forum believes 2017 and 2018 Warriors were the same team.
I win.
[QUOTE=Overdrive;14839732]I think if you give the '86 Celtics a season to adapt to the modern era they'd have a chance. Other than that I don't think any team possesses the raw talent and shooting capability to stand a chance.
I firmly believe that Jordan is the better player between him and Lebron, but if someone believes the Cavs should've won '17 or any of Jordan's Bullsteams could've they're retarded.[/QUOTE]
No team in history of the 80s and 90s or 2000s scores enough points over 7 games to stop the 2017 Warriors.
I dont know how anyone can watch the NBA seriously and think the 2017 Warriors were same as the 2018 Warriors.
[QUOTE=dankok8;14839788]Don't forget Bill Laimbeer who was a very good two-way big man in his own right and made 4 all-star games.
Or Mark Aguirre who came over from Dallas where he put up huge scoring numbers and made 3 all-star games.
Or Rick Mahorn who was an enforcer big basically Charles Oakley light.
Or John Salley who was their 9th man but could contribute on both ends.
The Bad Boy Pistons didn't have any superstars but they had like 9 guys who were at least close to all-star level. They legit might be the deepest team in NBA history.
By the way I'm really surprised you have the 1993 Bulls in your top 5. They were the worst Bulls title team LOL.[/QUOTE]
Isiah Thomas was definitely a superstar
Only a casual with no eye for detail would call the 1993 team the worst Bulls championship team.
If you’re referring to strictly regular season record, yes. Scottie Pippen was gassed following the Olympics and two back-to-back championship runs and under performed all year. They moved John Paxton into the bench, and BJ Armstrong ascended to starter, and he was a much better defender, quicker off the dribble, and also a spot up knockdown three-point shooter.
They also clearly didn’t have their foot on the pedal the entire regular season, coasting.
They also were facing a red target on their back as the first team to potentially three peat since Russell and Cousy’s Celtics. They saw bottom feeders best every night. And 1993 is one of the all-time peak years in terms of talent in basketball.
In the second round, they beat a good Cleveland Cavalier team.
In the conference finals, they beat the best defensive team in the league, Pat Riley’s great 60-22 New York Knicks, after coming back down from 0-2.
In the finals, they beat a legitimate great 3 star team, led by peak MVP Barkley, the best offensive team in the league the 62-20 Suns. And didn’t have home court advantage.
Context.
[QUOTE=WhiteKyrie;14839740]
The Bulls could beat the 2017 Warriors. Basketball is a game of matchups, and what Chicago brings to the table strength wise would give them issue.
[/QUOTE]
No way. The Bulls don't score enough points over 7 games to matchup against the 2017 Warriors.
[QUOTE=8Ball;14839822]No way. The Bulls don't score enough points over 7 games to matchup against the 2017 Warriors.[/QUOTE]
You don’t need to score as much when you’re a nuisance defensively. Chicago’s defense led to transition points. Old Chris Paul and James Harden had them on the ropes. Jordan and Pippen would be more than fine.
Chicago barely hit 3s, they would legitimately get swept just based off of math. You would have to teach them to play the modern style for them to have a chance. Even then they started two complete non shooters in Rodman and Longley and MJ, Pippen and Harper were all below average 3Pt shooters as well.
[QUOTE=WhiteKyrie;14839819]Isiah Thomas was definitely a superstar
Only a casual with no eye for detail would call the 1993 team the worst Bulls championship team.
If you’re referring to strictly regular season record, yes. Scottie Pippen was gassed following the Olympics and two back-to-back championship runs and under performed all year. They moved John Paxton into the bench, and BJ Armstrong ascended to starter, and he was a much better defender, quicker off the dribble, and also a spot up knockdown three-point shooter.
They also clearly didn’t have their foot on the pedal the entire regular season, coasting.
They also were facing a red target on their back as the first team to potentially three peat since Russell and Cousy’s Celtics. They saw bottom feeders best every night. And 1993 is one of the all-time peak years in terms of talent in basketball.
In the second round, they beat a good Cleveland Cavalier team.
In the conference finals, they beat the best defensive team in the league, Pat Riley’s 60-22 New York Knicks, after coming back down from 0-2.
In the finals, they beat a legitimate 3 star team, led by peak MVP Barkley, the best offensive team in the league the 62-20 Suns. And didn’t have home court advantage.
Context.[/QUOTE]
It's not just the regular season. The 93 Bulls got pushed to the brink by both the Knicks and Suns. Not just in terms of games but point differentials in those series were super tight. Their defense was actually quite poor for their standards.
1993 is the one year where if they replayed it like ten times, the Bulls would have actually lost a few times. In their other runs, they looked way more dominant.
[QUOTE=WhiteKyrie;14839829]You don’t need to score as much when you’re a nuisance defensively. Chicago’s defense led to transition points. Old Chris Paul and James Harden had them on the ropes. Jordan and Pippen would be more than fine.[/QUOTE]
2017 Warriors did not face the 2018 Houston Rockets (the team that had the 2018 Warriors on the ropes as you say). 2017 Warriors were never on the ropes, they swept the playoffs except for 1 game in the finals.
You are trying to tell me the 93 Bulls or 96 Bulls would be able to keep the 2017 Warriors at 100 points or less for 7 games? Because that's what it would take to beat them since those Bulls teams aren't throwing up 110 ppg against those 2017 Warriors.
[QUOTE=dankok8;14839838]It's not just the regular season. The 93 Bulls got pushed to the brink by both the Knicks and Suns. Not just in terms of games but point differentials in those series were super tight. Their defense was actually quite poor for their standards.
1993 is the one year where if they replayed it like ten times, the Bulls would have actually lost a few times. In their other runs, they looked way more dominant.[/QUOTE]
That can’t be proven. Lol they faced great competition and came out on top, that’s the point. They coasted in the regular season. Turned it on in the playoffs. And beat two great 60+ win teams. Back to back. Both the best defense and best offensive team. The end. Out defended the best defensive team when playoff time came and out scored the best offense with money on the table time.
1991 Pistons wasn’t their best version, they were good but not very good.
1991 Lakers were very good but not great.
1992 Cavs were very good but not great.
1992 Blazers were very good but not great.
1993 Cavs, very good.
1993 Knicks, great.
1993 Suns, great.
1996 Magic, great.
1996 Sonics, great.
1997 Hawks, very good.
1997 Heat, great.
1997 Jazz, great.
1998 Pacers, very good.
1998 Jazz, great.
1993, 1996, and 1997 those Bulls teams back to back beat great teams in the conference finals and finals.
[QUOTE=WhiteKyrie;14839740]No. The 2017 Warriors are one of the five best teams I’ve ever seen in real time in my life.
Which if anyone cares:
1993 Bulls
1996 Bulls
1997 Bulls
2001 Lakers
2017 Warriors
2017 GSW were clicking on all cylinders, great chemistry, great vibes, played harmoniously, motivated.
But not for meaningless shit like regular season record ala 2016.
The 2018 team was a little more flawed and then obviously 2019 they had problems with chemistry due to Draymond and Kevin Durant conflict.
And to the Michael Jordan / Kobe hating dude, 1987 Lakers …
The Bulls could beat the 2017 Warriors. Basketball is a game of matchups, and what Chicago brings to the table strength wise would give them issue.
If they struggled with the Chris Paul and James Harden Rockets and the 2019 Raptors. Even if those version of the Warriors are slightly inferior to the 2017 one, Chicago, particularly given what type of rules set you’re playing by. Whether it’s the actual sport of basketball, or the modern loose entertainment rules, either way they could give them issue. The Bulls greatest strengths were perimeter defense. And DrAPEmond would be mind****ed into oblivion by Dennis Rodman. But would be a great matchup.
2001 Lakers would give them issue and could beat them too. Because there is no solution with that extra small ball for Shaq. And by that point, Kobe Bryant was the top three to top five player in the league and a co-Alpha. That’s why they were so absurdly dominant. A legitimate two headed monster with 2 of the 3 best players in the league. Shaq / Duncan / Kobe were the best players in the game. Them after them KG / AI / Kidd at that time. 2001 Lakers could beat those 2017 Warriors.
The 2017 Cavs were a three all star super team and tremendously offensively talented, but they don’t bring anything to the table that could slow the Warriors strengths down or offer an alternative they can’t stop.
It’s chess not checkers.
Those Cavs don’t have the perimeter defense Jordan w/ Pippen’s Bulls had. And they don’t have utter dominance down low that the 2001 Lakers had.
Stopped making passive aggressive and thinly veiled excuses for LeBron. He didn’t face unanimously the best team of all time. They are one of the best. But definitely not definitive. The Cavaliers, if they played an ounce of defense, could’ve made that series competitive.
They should’ve won game three, but LeBron was too pussified league to stay on Kevin Durant on a weak ass screen, and go over the top to contest KD’s jumper or dribble penetration, and instead switched off and let JR Smith to hang out to dry who didn’t have the requisite size to guard Kevin Durant.[/QUOTE]
The problem about matchups is that you expect Pippen, Rodman and Jordan defend like in the 90s while the Warriors could spread the floor like no other team they've ever faced. The Pacers with Reggie at the helm have the Bulls the business. The Sonics in 96 showed glimpses they could beat them. Teams that only kept 2 of those 3 guys busy.
Chess not checkers, but dude you play connect 4.
[QUOTE=8Ball;14839818]No team in history of the 80s and 90s or 2000s scores enough points over 7 games to stop the 2017 Warriors.
I dont know how anyone can watch the NBA seriously and think the 2017 Warriors were same as the 2018 Warriors.[/QUOTE]
As said I think the 1986 Celtics could if you let them play a whole season first. They had shooting and 3 scorers that could give you 20 and more in the same game with a really good supporting cast. I think any other team doesn't stand a chance even with a full season to adapt.
[QUOTE=Overdrive;14839877]As said I think the 1986 Celtics could if you let them play a whole season first. They had shooting and 3 scorers that could give you 20 and more in the same game with a really good supporting cast. I think any other team doesn't stand a chance even with a full season to adapt.[/QUOTE]
Who were the 3 point shooters on that 86 Celtics?
I'll give you Bird is an elite shooter. Who else could do it on high volume even if you gave them multiple seasons to practice 3s?
86 Celtics attempted 393 3s at 35% make.
17 Warriors attempted 2520 3s at 38.3% make.
[QUOTE=8Ball;14839887]Who were the 3 point shooters on that 86 Celtics?
I'll give you Bird is an elite shooter. Who else could do it on high volume even if you gave them multiple seasons to practice 3s?
86 Celtics attempted 393 3s at 35% make.
17 Warriors attempted 2520 3s at 38.3% make.[/QUOTE]
Danny ainge obviously.
As for this thread, obviously they’re not. Chemistry can get worse older stars can decline you lose depth etc.
I brought this up before, but the 2001 & 2002 Lakers are an even more glaring example of this. One dominated the playoffs, the other if we're being honest should have lost.
it's fukking retarded to compare the best team in 2017 to the best team of the 80's or 90's. the coaching and scheming is so advanced and the average player possesses so much more skill.
so yea, if you put the 96 bulls or the 86 celtics in a time machine and sent them forward to the year 2017 and they had to play the warriors... they wold get crushed. the warriors aren't even playing the same game they are. they're far too advanced.
they would need time to adapt.
2017 Warriors were better
Like I mentioned in the other thread when this was being talked about, the '17 Warriors were better because they were more poised. Not only were Curry, Klay, and Draymond more hungry to win a championship after being beaten 3-1 by the Cavs the previous year, but KD also had something to prove.
Obviously the time machine argument is dumb. The teams have to adapt to the new era they are put in.
The matchup depends on the rules as well. Allow the Bulls to be physical, handcheck, and Looney/Green defenders to sit in the paint with no 3 second rule and it will be tough for the Warriors. Likewise if the rules are modern ones and you can't touch Curry or KD, it will be very tough for the Bulls.
Can't go wrong either way, since both teams blessed curry with phenomenal screensetters after all.
[QUOTE=SaltyMeatballs;14839908]2017 Warriors were better
Like I mentioned in the other thread when this was being talked about, the '17 Warriors were better because they were more poised. Not only were Curry, Klay, and Draymond more hungry to win a championship after being beaten 3-1 by the Cavs the previous year, but KD also had something to prove.[/QUOTE]
Advanced? No just different. Players wouldn’t be allowed to illegally palm, carry and travel all over the court. Also harder to dance with the ball and look more skilled when they’re not allowed to be touched or have to handle physicality. It works both ways.