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

[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.

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.

A young Shaq would have forced the Warriors to play big or risk Green fouling out. Shaq would have conceded the 3 and payed for it but the war on attrition would have gone shaqs way.

Its interesting but in the near future a players like KAT and Embiid may be better served focusing on their post game as a way to over take the Warriors. 1 versatile post dominate big along with four A+ perimeter defenders who can shoot may be the only plan for taking out the Warriors.

Yeah, people tend to remember the old, plodding Shaq. Prime Shaq was capable of scoring more efficiently against this GS team than Curry/Durant over the course of a series. Your only shot of lowering his efficiency is fouling, but there's only so much you can do. Kobe would have had one or two GS players in foul trouble on his own on most nights anyway.

Look at games 1+2 of the Finals so far. See how effective Lebron is when he gets to the basket? Well, Shaq would do the same except he wouldn't expend all of his energy doing it because he could just post up and receive an entry pass.

Except last night with Draymond in foul trouble KD played a lot at the 5 and with Iggy at the 4. No way Shaq can guard KD in today's game no matter how old he was. Obviously KD can't defend a back to the basket Shaq, so the question becomes who scores more efficiently it's KD every time. Also, Golden State wouldn't play Zaza and McGee if they were facing an in his prime Shaq.

I honestly think MVP Shaq scores 9 times out of 10 guarded by Durant and/or fouls him out. The occasional trap and step back three by Durant would leave him in a net deficit efficiency. So actually, I think Shaq forces GS to play Zaza and McGee at the 5 just to allow themselves a chance at matching his efficiency.

Well that's the interesting part of all of this, we'll never know. I respectfully think the opposite, that Shaq will give up to KD more than he scores, but hey since we can't be wrong we're both right! 

[Moranis]

There are certainly arguments for this, especially if they sweep or win in 5 (I still think it goes at least 6, but who knows).  Curry and Durant have won the last three league MVP's (though not this year).  They are two of the most dynamic offensive players in league history and are credible enough defensively (Durant is better than credible).  Thompson, who hasn't really showed up offensively, is also a very dynamic offensive player and a superb wing defender.  Green is the dirty work do everything player that all great teams have.  They have a very good top end of the bench with players for every type of situation.  Under modern rules no team touches them, and even under the old style, their overall shooting prowess will just be problematic for most teams. I mean how does Harper or Kerr guard Curry. Can Bird really stay with Durant?  Obviously it works the other way as well, especially with the size down low, but I'm just not sure the older teams can keep up with the shooting of the Warriors.

Wouldn't Jordan guard Curry? If so, that's not good for Curry because he probably gets baited into taking the challenge until his confidence is lost (Curry is prone to this). Harper could guard Thompson. Pippen could check Durant about as well as any player ever could. Pippen might be the one guy in history you'd pick to guard Kevin Durant.

I don't think Jordan had the speed to guard Curry, even with hand checking.  I mean that only works if you are up on the player, and I just don't see Jordan being able to keep Curry in front of him.  I also think Harper would struggle with Thompson, though he would be able to handle him easier than Curry.  And making Jordan move around that much, would greatly diminish his offense.  Jordan was a superb defender, but much like Lebron he often took plays off defensively to stay fresher offensively. 

Pippen would struggle with Durant.  His length, speed, and athleticism would be a lot to handle, even for someone as good defensively as Pippen.  Players like Durant just didn't exist in any other era.  Bird was one of the few really long SF's of the older times and he was no where near the athlete Durant is (Bird was a nastier player though and had an IQ almost unrivaled). 

I don't think the Warriors would have any issues matching up well with the Bulls.  A team with a monster down low would pose a lot more problems.  I mean there is no way the Warriors could defend Shaq, Hakeem, McHale, Kareem, Moses, etc. in their prime.  That is where a true mismatch would lie and those teams would have a shot at keeping up with the Warriors frentic pace, because they would be able to score a lot of high percentage shots, would force the Warriors to keep a big on the floor, and would draw a lot of fouls. 

[Vermont Green]

This team is really good but talent is more diluted now.  GSW is better relative to all other current teams than these other teams were relative to the other teams of their times.  They have two generational players just like Kobe-Shaq, Bird-McHale, etc. Other than LeBron/Cavs, there are no other teams that are close.  That is the difference.

[gift]

There are certainly arguments for this, especially if they sweep or win in 5 (I still think it goes at least 6, but who knows).  Curry and Durant have won the last three league MVP's (though not this year).  They are two of the most dynamic offensive players in league history and are credible enough defensively (Durant is better than credible).  Thompson, who hasn't really showed up offensively, is also a very dynamic offensive player and a superb wing defender.  Green is the dirty work do everything player that all great teams have.  They have a very good top end of the bench with players for every type of situation.  Under modern rules no team touches them, and even under the old style, their overall shooting prowess will just be problematic for most teams. I mean how does Harper or Kerr guard Curry. Can Bird really stay with Durant?  Obviously it works the other way as well, especially with the size down low, but I'm just not sure the older teams can keep up with the shooting of the Warriors.

Wouldn't Jordan guard Curry? If so, that's not good for Curry because he probably gets baited into taking the challenge until his confidence is lost (Curry is prone to this). Harper could guard Thompson. Pippen could check Durant about as well as any player ever could. Pippen might be the one guy in history you'd pick to guard Kevin Durant.

I don't think Jordan had the speed to guard Curry, even with hand checking.  I mean that only works if you are up on the player, and I just don't see Jordan being able to keep Curry in front of him.  I also think Harper would struggle with Thompson, though he would be able to handle him easier than Curry.  And making Jordan move around that much, would greatly diminish his offense.  Jordan was a superb defender, but much like Lebron he often took plays off defensively to stay fresher offensively. 

Pippen would struggle with Durant.  His length, speed, and athleticism would be a lot to handle, even for someone as good defensively as Pippen.  Players like Durant just didn't exist in any other era.  Bird was one of the few really long SF's of the older times and he was no where near the athlete Durant is (Bird was a nastier player though and had an IQ almost unrivaled). 

I don't think the Warriors would have any issues matching up well with the Bulls.  A team with a monster down low would pose a lot more problems.  I mean there is no way the Warriors could defend Shaq, Hakeem, McHale, Kareem, Moses, etc. in their prime.  That is where a true mismatch would lie and those teams would have a shot at keeping up with the Warriors frentic pace, because they would be able to score a lot of high percentage shots, would force the Warriors to keep a big on the floor, and would draw a lot of fouls.

Pippen wouldn't shut Durant down. But he'd probably defend him better than anyone ever has.

Early 90s Jordan has sufficient speed plus physicality to guard Curry. Curry isn't quick enough to get by Jordan if Jordan wants to keep him in front of him. He's only a driving threat because of his shot, and he really wants to shoot more than anything. He'll get his points, but he'll probably mess up the offense and play inefficiently in the process. Look at last night's game for an example. He scored, but alienated Thompson and turned the ball over. And that's while being guarded by lesser defensive opponents than Jordan. He's been guarded successfully on the perimeter by Matthew Dellavedova and once on a key play by Kevin Love. Sure he'll put his goggles on and smile with that mouthpiece sticking out here and there, but Jordan is absolutely bad news for Curry on the whole.

[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.

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.

A young Shaq would have forced the Warriors to play big or risk Green fouling out. Shaq would have conceded the 3 and payed for it but the war on attrition would have gone shaqs way.

Its interesting but in the near future a players like KAT and Embiid may be better served focusing on their post game as a way to over take the Warriors. 1 versatile post dominate big along with four A+ perimeter defenders who can shoot may be the only plan for taking out the Warriors.

Yeah, people tend to remember the old, plodding Shaq. Prime Shaq was capable of scoring more efficiently against this GS team than Curry/Durant over the course of a series. Your only shot of lowering his efficiency is fouling, but there's only so much you can do. Kobe would have had one or two GS players in foul trouble on his own on most nights anyway.

Look at games 1+2 of the Finals so far. See how effective Lebron is when he gets to the basket? Well, Shaq would do the same except he wouldn't expend all of his energy doing it because he could just post up and receive an entry pass.

Except last night with Draymond in foul trouble KD played a lot at the 5 and with Iggy at the 4. No way Shaq can guard KD in today's game no matter how old he was. Obviously KD can't defend a back to the basket Shaq, so the question becomes who scores more efficiently it's KD every time. Also, Golden State wouldn't play Zaza and McGee if they were facing an in his prime Shaq.

I honestly think MVP Shaq scores 9 times out of 10 guarded by Durant and/or fouls him out. The occasional trap and step back three by Durant would leave him in a net deficit efficiency. So actually, I think Shaq forces GS to play Zaza and McGee at the 5 just to allow themselves a chance at matching his efficiency.

Well that's the interesting part of all of this, we'll never know. I respectfully think the opposite, that Shaq will give up to KD more than he scores, but hey since we can't be wrong we're both right! 

You're right that we'll never *know* because they will never play against each other but we can reasonably make an intelligent guess.

KD would not guard Shaq. He couldn't physically do it. He simply doesn't have the weight or power and an attempt to do that would likely result in KD getting injured. Shaq would bounce him into the 4th row. This isn't a Rocky movie with Balboa taking on Thunderlips and winning. This is real life and Durant's 230-240 pounds is no match for Shaq's 350+. This physical beating - and that's what it would be - would totally wear down Durant on the offensive end. There's not a coach out there who would subject their best player to that kind of beatdown.

Nor would Shaq guard Durant. He's too quick and you're not going to put Shaq out on the perimeter. You'd play zone and Durant wouldn't dare drive on Shaq because (again) he'd run serious risk of injury. 

[bdm860]

There are certainly arguments for this, especially if they sweep or win in 5 (I still think it goes at least 6, but who knows).  Curry and Durant have won the last three league MVP's (though not this year).  They are two of the most dynamic offensive players in league history and are credible enough defensively (Durant is better than credible).  Thompson, who hasn't really showed up offensively, is also a very dynamic offensive player and a superb wing defender.  Green is the dirty work do everything player that all great teams have.  They have a very good top end of the bench with players for every type of situation.  Under modern rules no team touches them, and even under the old style, their overall shooting prowess will just be problematic for most teams. I mean how does Harper or Kerr guard Curry. Can Bird really stay with Durant?  Obviously it works the other way as well, especially with the size down low, but I'm just not sure the older teams can keep up with the shooting of the Warriors.

Wouldn't Jordan guard Curry? If so, that's not good for Curry because he probably gets baited into taking the challenge until his confidence is lost (Curry is prone to this). Harper could guard Thompson. Pippen could check Durant about as well as any player ever could. Pippen might be the one guy in history you'd pick to guard Kevin Durant.

I don't think Jordan had the speed to guard Curry, even with hand checking.  I mean that only works if you are up on the player, and I just don't see Jordan being able to keep Curry in front of him.  I also think Harper would struggle with Thompson, though he would be able to handle him easier than Curry.  And making Jordan move around that much, would greatly diminish his offense.  Jordan was a superb defender, but much like Lebron he often took plays off defensively to stay fresher offensively. 

Pippen would struggle with Durant.  His length, speed, and athleticism would be a lot to handle, even for someone as good defensively as Pippen.  Players like Durant just didn't exist in any other era.  Bird was one of the few really long SF's of the older times and he was no where near the athlete Durant is (Bird was a nastier player though and had an IQ almost unrivaled). 

I don't think the Warriors would have any issues matching up well with the Bulls.  A team with a monster down low would pose a lot more problems.  I mean there is no way the Warriors could defend Shaq, Hakeem, McHale, Kareem, Moses, etc. in their prime.  That is where a true mismatch would lie and those teams would have a shot at keeping up with the Warriors frentic pace, because they would be able to score a lot of high percentage shots, would force the Warriors to keep a big on the floor, and would draw a lot of fouls.

Pippen wouldn't shut Durant down. But he'd probably defend him better than anyone ever has.

Early 90s Jordan has sufficient speed plus physicality to guard Curry. Curry isn't quick enough to get by Jordan if Jordan wants to keep him in front of him. He's only a driving threat because of his shot, and he really wants to shoot more than anything. He'll get his points, but he'll probably mess up the offense and play inefficiently in the process. Look at last night's game for an example. He scored, but alienated Thompson and turned the ball over. And that's while being guarded by lesser defensive opponents than Jordan. He's been guarded successfully on the perimeter by Matthew Dellavedova and once on a key play by Kevin Love. Sure he'll put his goggles on and smile with that mouthpiece sticking out here and there, but Jordan is absolutely bad news for Curry on the whole.

Be careful not to mix and match your Jordans here.  There's a difference between 28 year old Jordan and 32 year old Jordan.

Hey if you're arguing for the '92 Bulls, then you're fine, but you can't use that Jordan when talking about the '96 Bulls.

[PhoSita]

It's hard to think of many other teams that had

2 MVP caliber, top 5 players

1 All-star caliber DPOY candidate

1 Perennial All-star, elite defender, top 5 at his position

Plus a stable of valuable role players including a guy who won Finals MVP two years ago.

[Dannys Chipotle Guy]

They could be. They are certainly in the discussion.

lets see the whole body of work before crowning them.

I think the '87 Lakers, '86 Celtics and '96 Bulls are all in that discussion.

[Dannys Chipotle Guy]

It's hard to think of many other teams that had

2 MVP caliber, top 5 players

1 All-star caliber DPOY candidate

1 Perennial All-star, elite defender, top 5 at his position

Plus a stable of valuable role players including a guy who won Finals MVP two years ago.

Im sure you could find some teams with a similar collection of talent back in the 60s and 70s but thats not really a fair comparison.

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

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.

Apparently the ability to put the ball in the basket and prevent the other team from doing so is now a gimmick... fascinating.

[Somebody]

I think I'm the youngest guy here, but I'll go with the 60s Celtics. They were just too good on defense and were great at offense. I believe Cousy will match Curry's production, Sam Jones is better than Thompson, Sanders can guard KD as well as anyone, Tommy would beat up Draymond and Russell would dominate on the boards and defense. They also won 11 championships in a league that talent was concentrated on 8 teams, which resulted in absolute bloodbaths.

[celticsclay]

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.

Apparently the ability to put the ball in the basket and prevent the other team from doing so is now a gimmick... fascinating.

I am pretty he is referring to not allowing to handcheck at all, players getting awarded 3 points from throwing the ball in the air from half court, players kicking their legs out while shooting to draw contact, complete mockery of palming and traveling calls. Some of the changes are good, but other ones are bad. (Which is one of the reasons that the commissioner has talked about addressing a rule change for some of the foul calls behind the arc this offseason.

 However, instead of addressing this very real change in the way the game has been called over different eras you did another one of your snide comments that adds nothing to the conversation. I really used to enjoy some of your posts on the 76ers but this seems to be all you do now. I don't understand for the life of me why you do it.

[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.

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.

A young Shaq would have forced the Warriors to play big or risk Green fouling out. Shaq would have conceded the 3 and payed for it but the war on attrition would have gone shaqs way.

Its interesting but in the near future a players like KAT and Embiid may be better served focusing on their post game as a way to over take the Warriors. 1 versatile post dominate big along with four A+ perimeter defenders who can shoot may be the only plan for taking out the Warriors.

Yeah, people tend to remember the old, plodding Shaq. Prime Shaq was capable of scoring more efficiently against this GS team than Curry/Durant over the course of a series. Your only shot of lowering his efficiency is fouling, but there's only so much you can do. Kobe would have had one or two GS players in foul trouble on his own on most nights anyway.

Look at games 1+2 of the Finals so far. See how effective Lebron is when he gets to the basket? Well, Shaq would do the same except he wouldn't expend all of his energy doing it because he could just post up and receive an entry pass.

Except last night with Draymond in foul trouble KD played a lot at the 5 and with Iggy at the 4. No way Shaq can guard KD in today's game no matter how old he was. Obviously KD can't defend a back to the basket Shaq, so the question becomes who scores more efficiently it's KD every time. Also, Golden State wouldn't play Zaza and McGee if they were facing an in his prime Shaq.

I honestly think MVP Shaq scores 9 times out of 10 guarded by Durant and/or fouls him out. The occasional trap and step back three by Durant would leave him in a net deficit efficiency. So actually, I think Shaq forces GS to play Zaza and McGee at the 5 just to allow themselves a chance at matching his efficiency.

Well that's the interesting part of all of this, we'll never know. I respectfully think the opposite, that Shaq will give up to KD more than he scores, but hey since we can't be wrong we're both right! 

You're right that we'll never *know* because they will never play against each other but we can reasonably make an intelligent guess.

KD would not guard Shaq. He couldn't physically do it. He simply doesn't have the weight or power and an attempt to do that would likely result in KD getting injured. Shaq would bounce him into the 4th row. This isn't a Rocky movie with Balboa taking on Thunderlips and winning. This is real life and Durant's 230-240 pounds is no match for Shaq's 350+. This physical beating - and that's what it would be - would totally wear down Durant on the offensive end. There's not a coach out there who would subject their best player to that kind of beatdown.

Nor would Shaq guard Durant. He's too quick and you're not going to put Shaq out on the perimeter. You'd play zone and Durant wouldn't dare drive on Shaq because (again) he'd run serious risk of injury.

But this is basketball and we're talking line ups. In today's pace and space basketball game Shaq couldn't be on the floor in a KD at the 5 lineup like we saw last night. Like you said their is no one to guard. One on one, sure Shaq's post game and body is superior to KD, just as KD's ISO game and shooting are superior to Shaq's, but if your solution is it doesn't matter they have no one that can guard him give it to him in the post every time I'll take the Warriors offense vs. posting up Shaq every time.

[JSD]

Not when they lose in 7 again.

[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.

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.

Yes the 82 team. They should be in the poll.