86 Celtics. 5 of their top 6 are in the HOF, and Ainge was a heck of a player.
I agree. Put down the '84 Celtics as well-and the '85 Lakers.
Golden State would struggle to rebound against both of those teams. Boston would be able to control the 2nd chance opportunities, limiting the fast break of Golden State. Showtime Lakers would make it difficult for Golden State as well.
Walton is in the HOF, but he was far from a HOF player in 86. DJ while in the HOF was no where near a 1st ballot guy. It isn't like the C's had 5 surefire HOFers in their prime. They had 3 (though Parish is as much a longevity thing as anything). Bird and McHale were talented freak of nature type players (though Bird more for intelligence and nastiness as pure athleticism).
There are many comparisons to the Warriors in that regard. Curry and Durant are the Bird and McHale type players. Thompson is the DJ. Green is a Parish level talent. Iggy is fairly similar to Walton (at that point in Walton's career and Iggy might actually be better). Livingston and Ainge were similar level players throughout their careers. There really is no comparison for someone like West except perhaps a lesser version of Walton but he is certainly on par with Wedman.
Obviously Boston is a lot bigger, but Golden State is a lot faster, way more athletic, and overall a much better shooting team (though the C's were quite good especially for the era). Under the modern rules, I just don't see how the C's could stay with the Warriors. I think Green would do alright on McHale, and while Parish and Walton would be difficult to defend (though Zaza and McGee aren't bad defenders), it isn't like those guys were #1 or #2 scoring option type players (again at that point of Walton's career).
Poll