Are the 2016-17 Warriors the greatest team in NBA history?

[Jvalin]

More importantly, given the fact that the Warriors seem to be unbeatable, should we consider taking a step back?

[Roy H.]

86 Celtics.  5 of their top 6 are in the HOF, and Ainge was a heck of a player.

[slamtheking]

well, based on the list provided, the 86 celtics. 

I'd take any of the Celtic or Laker teams from 80-87 against anyone who came after them and any Philly team from 80-85 as well. 

GSW may have a lot of shooters but C's have a frontline none of the other teams could deal with when healthy

[Redz]

86 Celtics.  5 of their top 6 are in the HOF, and Ainge was a heck of a player.

It's been hard enough having to see Larry "surpassed" by Lebron on the greatest SF lists these days.  I will never submit to any arguments against the `86 Celtics though.  In my green tinted eyes there will never be a better team.

[JohnBoy65]

It's so tough to rank teams especially in different eras. Golden State plays a brand of basketball no one has seen before. I try to think of matchups. 2000 Shaq wouldn't be able to play in a series against GS. Who would he gaurd? Larry bird would guard Klay right, but who would guard KD on that 85 Celtics team.

I am not sure there's another team in NBA History that has presented this type of matchup challenge with the lineups Golden State can put out there.

[Granath]

well, based on the list provided, the 86 celtics. 

I'd take any of the Celtic or Laker teams from 80-87 against anyone who came after them and any Philly team from 80-85 as well. 

GSW may have a lot of shooters but C's have a frontline none of the other teams could deal with when healthy

I said in a thread prior that it all depends on the rules of the era.

If we played by 1986 rules, Boston would likely sweep GS. They simply couldn't handle the physical differences of hand checking, pushing, shoving, elbows and so forth that came about when only two refs were on the court. They'd be manhandled right off the court with no free looks at the 22 foot 3 point line.

Played by today's rules, the 86 Celtics would be lucky to extend the series to 6. GS would get a lot of clean looks and while Boston would still clean up on the boards, they'd be shooting 2 pointers at a 55% clip while GS would be hitting 3s at a 40% clip. Parrish would have to get out of the lane or 3 seconds would be called every time. GS would slowly pull away and as the Celtics got into foul trouble they'd sprint away.

[LilRip]

Interesting list. Has the talent level in the big man pool dried up or why does it seem like big men are all but irrelevant in today's game (compared to guards and swings)?

[Granath]

It's so tough to rank teams especially in different eras. Golden State plays a brand of basketball no one has seen before. I try to think of matchups. 2000 Shaq wouldn't be able to play in a series against GS. Who would he gaurd? Larry bird would guard Klay right, but who would guard KD on that 85 Celtics team.

I am not sure there's another team in NBA History that has presented this type of matchup challenge with the lineups Golden State can put out there.

Actually, the 6'5" Ainge would get Klay and Bird would get KD.

[action781]

It's so tough to rank teams especially in different eras. Golden State plays a brand of basketball no one has seen before. I try to think of matchups. 2000 Shaq wouldn't be able to play in a series against GS. Who would he gaurd? Larry bird would guard Klay right, but who would guard KD on that 85 Celtics team.

I am not sure there's another team in NBA History that has presented this type of matchup challenge with the lineups Golden State can put out there.

Why wouldn't Shaq be able to play against GS?  He'd guard Zaza and Javale during their combined 30 minutes before they both foul out.  Then what, GS tries to put David West or Draymond on him?

You might be forgetting how dominant Shaq was in 2000.  Looking back in the box scores:
Game 1 -- 43 points (21/31 shooting), 19 reb, 4 ast, 3 blk, 2 to.  Smits fouled out in only 20 minutes.
Game 2 -- 40 points (11/18 shooting), 24 reb, 4 ast, 3 blk, 2 to.  Smits committed 5 fouls in 18 minutes.
I'm not going to post all of them (those were 2 of his best 3 games), but he averaged 38.7ppg and 16.7rpg that series while playing 45.5 min per game (he wasn't the slow tired Shaq we saw in Boston).  Rik Smits could only stay on the floor 19.3 min per game.

[LilRip]

It's so tough to rank teams especially in different eras. Golden State plays a brand of basketball no one has seen before. I try to think of matchups. 2000 Shaq wouldn't be able to play in a series against GS. Who would he gaurd? Larry bird would guard Klay right, but who would guard KD on that 85 Celtics team.

I am not sure there's another team in NBA History that has presented this type of matchup challenge with the lineups Golden State can put out there.

Why wouldn't Shaq be able to play against GS?  He'd guard Zaza and Javale during their combined 30 minutes before they both foul out.  Then what, GS tries to put David West or Draymond on him?

You might be forgetting how dominant Shaq was in 2000.  Looking back in the box scores:
Game 1 -- 43 points (21/31 shooting), 19 reb, 4 ast, 3 blk, 2 to.  Smits fouled out in only 20 minutes.
Game 2 -- 40 points (11/18 shooting), 24 reb, 4 ast, 3 blk, 2 to.  Smits committed 5 fouls in 18 minutes.
I'm not going to post all of them (those were 2 of his best 3 games), but he averaged 38.7ppg and 16.7rpg that series while playing 45.5 min per game (he wasn't the slow tired Shaq we saw in Boston).  Rik Smits could only stay on the floor 19.3 min per game.

TP. People strangely associate Shaq with being some lumbering dinosaur. Maybe when he was in his late 30's but in his prime Shaq was a beast. And he wasn't all dunks too.

[Surferdad]

There were a couple of great 76ers teams too that are often mentioned in the same breath. One is the 1967 team with Dr. J, Mo Cheeks, Charles Barkley, Moses Malone and Bobby Jones (?) I think.

[Granath]

There were a couple of great 76ers teams too that are often mentioned in the same breath. One is the 1967 team with Dr. J, Mo Cheeks, Charles Barkley, Moses Malone and Bobby Jones (?) I think.

I'm assuming you're thinking of the 1982 76ers with Dr. J, Moses, Cheeks and Andrew Toney that went 65-17 and 12-1 in the playoffs.

Barkley didn't join the league until 1984-5.

[Redz]

well, based on the list provided, the 86 celtics. 

I'd take any of the Celtic or Laker teams from 80-87 against anyone who came after them and any Philly team from 80-85 as well. 

GSW may have a lot of shooters but C's have a frontline none of the other teams could deal with when healthy

I said in a thread prior that it all depends on the rules of the era.

If we played by 1986 rules, Boston would likely sweep GS. They simply couldn't handle the physical differences of hand checking, pushing, shoving, elbows and so forth that came about when only two refs were on the court. They'd be manhandled right off the court with no free looks at the 22 foot 3 point line.

Played by today's rules, the 86 Celtics would be lucky to extend the series to 6. GS would get a lot of clean looks and while Boston would still clean up on the boards, they'd be shooting 2 pointers at a 55% clip while GS would be hitting 3s at a 40% clip. Parrish would have to get out of the lane or 3 seconds would be called every time. GS would slowly pull away and as the Celtics got into foul trouble they'd sprint away.

I'd pay good money to see a good McHale clothesline on Draymond or DJ ripping Curry's foolish mouthpiece out of his mouth (seriously, what is the guy a 2-year old?  No one wants to see that!)

[CFAN38]

Tough to comp teams across eras

in the 80s the Cs and Lakers teams would destroy golden state inside

in the modern NBA the Warriors run them off the court

All comes down to how the games are called and what rules are allowed. Hand checking and greater physicality would take a lot away from Curry and Durant.

[Who]

Warriors play in the gimmicky era of NBA basketball. They are the masters of this era but cannot compete with the Champions of past eras under proper rules.

I cannot consider such a team the greatest of all time.

They are, however, the greatest team of this new era for NBA basketball.