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

[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.

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.

Shaq guards Iguodala or whatever non-dribble drive penetration threat there is. Meanwhile, GSW will probably just resort to the hack-a-Shaq which kills flow. As much as it sucks, I really have a hard time imagining the Dubs containing those Lakers or getting away with small ball against a team with an all time dominant big man.

And yeah, hand checking matters. Tyronne Lue was able to do an amazing job on Iverson because he was able to hold onto him the whole time. Prime MVP Iverson is much faster and more athletic than Curry. As crazy as it sounds, I think Lue would've done a terrific job on Curry.

Guys like Kyrie and Curry benefit so much from the rules now because you can't divert them away from the basket once they've started their drive. To be a great defender in this league, you need be to long and quick, rather than strong and physical.

[Fan from VT]

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)?

I do not mean this in a snarky way, but I think it is because 3 points is worth more than 2 points and players have just gotten a lot better at getting 3 points.

[jpotter33]

Maybe it's just me, but I'd put the 08 Celtics against this Warriors team any day. You think that tough, KG-backed Boston D wouldn't punish the Warriors for their sloppy play and turnovers?

[tonydelk]

I think they are in the top 20.  One thing to consider is the officiating and rules were different and the players are so much more athletic today.  Players were a lot tougher in the past but I don't think Dray Green, KD, Curry could beat Shaq, Kobe, Jordan, Bird and others in a 7 games series. 

Teams that I think would be them.
Penny Hardaway and Shaq
Kobe and Shaq
Jordan and Pippen
08 Celtics
Bird, McCale, Parrish
There are others as well. 

[PhoSita]

Maybe it's just me, but I'd put the 08 Celtics against this Warriors team any day. You think that tough, KG-backed Boston D wouldn't punish the Warriors for their sloppy play and turnovers?

I just don't see how they could keep up in terms of outside shooting.

[Big333223]

I voted '86 Celtics but this is not an absurd question. It's not just recency bias.

From Zach Lowe's piece today, about GS's defense:

Golden State has yielded only 98.8 points per 100 possessions through the playoffs, a full 9.2 points stingier than the league average over the postseason, per research from our crack staff at ESPN Stats & Information. That is the largest such gap ever, by a big margin, among teams that have made the Finals under the current playoff format (dating back to the 1983-84 season). The 1987-88 Bad Boy Pistons come second, having allowed 7.8 fewer points per 100 possessions than the league average. In other words: Adjusted for competition, Golden State might be the best defensive team ever to advance this far.

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/19557495/zach-lowe-golden-state-warriors-defense-dominating-cleveland-cavaliers-2017-nba-finals

That's their defense in the playoffs. Nevermind that they're also one of the best offensive teams of all time.

[Moranis]

No team has ever swept the first 3 rounds.  No team has ever won 14 consecutive playoff games (multiple seasons counted).  No team has ever won 67 or more games for 3 consecutive seasons (in fact no team has even won 63 or more in 3 consecutive seasons).  The Warriors just keep piling on statistics.  It will soon be hard to deny their historical greatness.

[mmmmm]

Eh.  Both CLE and GSW got the benefit of playing conference finals opponents who lost their best player to injury.

If Leonard (and Parker) were healthy, there is a reasonable case to be made that GSW might not be 14-0 right now.

[celticsclay]

Eh.  Both CLE and GSW got the benefit of playing conference finals opponents who lost their best player to injury.

If Leonard (and Parker) were healthy, there is a reasonable case to be made that GSW might not be 14-0 right now.

Yes. I am not discounting the fact that Golden State is great, but that sweep record should not be used to argue it. If Leonard does not get injured that game, what is the chance Golden state wins even that game alone? 5%. The Spurs basically lost a version of Lebron James. Why are people just glossing over that fact?

Heck, the Blazers were missing their one small advantage over the Warriors in the first round in Nurkic who was the reason they even made the playoffs. Do the blazers lose game 2 up 17 if Nurkic is able to go? Aside from a game or two missed from Durant early on, the Warriors have had perfect health. That is really the key to winning the championship. There was a chance the Cavs would have beat the Warriors two years ago with Irving and Love able to go. The Warriors almost certainly win last year without losing Bogut, a suspended green, Curry on a gimpy leg and fumes and Iggy all jacked up. That is just the way it goes.

The Warriors are definitely an amazing team and in conversation for best ever, but the sweep stuff is really a mirage caused by circumstance.

[footey]

Tonight's game will go a long way toward answering the question presented.

[gift]

Eh.  Both CLE and GSW got the benefit of playing conference finals opponents who lost their best player to injury.

If Leonard (and Parker) were healthy, there is a reasonable case to be made that GSW might not be 14-0 right now.

More than reasonable. It's pretty clear GS would have lost Game 1 (at home) against the Spurs. Who knows how the rest of the series would have gone? Is it crazy to think they could have even lost the series?

[celticsclay]

Eh.  Both CLE and GSW got the benefit of playing conference finals opponents who lost their best player to injury.

If Leonard (and Parker) were healthy, there is a reasonable case to be made that GSW might not be 14-0 right now.

More than reasonable. It's pretty clear GS would have lost Game 1 (at home) against the Spurs. Who knows how the rest of the series would have gone? Is it crazy to think they could have even lost the series?

No it absolutely isn't. Many think Leonard is currently the best player in the game. I do myself. They only won 6 less games than the Warriors over the course of the year, and a lot of that was towards the end of the season when they were playing third string players in games.

Obviously it would be a big upset if that had happened, but then again, how big an advantage is Pops scheming against Mike Brown in a 7 game series?

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

You think McHale, Bird and Parish are running with this team?

Running wouldn't be a problem. The Celtics played at a faster pace than the Warriors, and routinely faced teams playing more quickly than the Dubs.

Before McHale broke that foot he could literally guard anyone...

Please provide an athlete remotely comparable to Kevin Durant from the 80s who was a 50-40-90 guy.

[Ilikesports17]

You think McHale, Bird and Parish are running with this team?

Running wouldn't be a problem. The Celtics played at a faster pace than the Warriors, and routinely faced teams playing more quickly than the Dubs.

Before McHale broke that foot he could literally guard anyone...

Please provide an athlete remotely comparable to Kevin Durant from the 80s who was a 50-40-90 guy.

Bird is the closes thing.

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

You think McHale, Bird and Parish are running with this team?

Running wouldn't be a problem. The Celtics played at a faster pace than the Warriors, and routinely faced teams playing more quickly than the Dubs.

Before McHale broke that foot he could literally guard anyone...

Please provide an athlete remotely comparable to Kevin Durant from the 80s who was a 50-40-90 guy.

Bird is the closes thing.

I agree, and Larry was a better offensive player imo. But he's not the athlete Durant is.