Anyone who thought the Cavs didn't have the talent/personnel to beat the Warriors, Thunder, or Spurs in a 7 game series was in denial.
@Regular_P was in the first quarter of game 1 talking bout it was over
Anyone who thought the Cavs didn't have the talent/personnel to beat the Warriors, Thunder, or Spurs in a 7 game series was in denial.
You don't have to win multiple titles to be an atg team.This should be the consensus
Compare the regular season to the playoffs brehs.It's weird when the Warriors missed the same open shots they'd been making for two straight seasons.
I would've given them that for winning a chip the same season as winning 73. I could see your argument cause that's a lot off losses in the playoffs. But that ring would've made up for it. And other atg teams went 7 games during their run.This is why the whole discussion silly to begin with. The bolded makes absolutely no sense. So the only thing that separates GS being a top 5 team of all time from not being mentioned at all is Kyrie's 3? Nah bruh. This playoffs proved that they're not one of the best teams of all time. They went 7-7 in the last two series losing 5 of the 7 by at least 14 points including losses by 30 and 28 or some shyt. No.
Yet they're really tryna run with this "both years were the same" rhetoric, as if losing Bogut's 12 mins for 3 games and Dray getting his dumbass suspended for 1 game is on equal ground with the situation Cleveland was in last season.That's like saying curry losing dray and klay being subtle detail
You weren't saying much when GS was up 3-1 and I was gloating. Then Draymond got that bullshyt suspension and everything changed.@Regular_P was in the first quarter of game 1 talking bout it was over
nikkas had 2-5 jokes ready
fukk the Warriors and their illegal screen, dikk kicking, wanna be NWO looking ass.
Don't care about their all time status. All I know is Bron and Kyrie helped take down a 73 win team.
But the 15-16 warriors didn't even win one chip. We all agree last years warriors wasn't an atg right?You don't have to win multiple titles to be an atg team.
You weren't saying much when GS was up 3-1 and I was gloating. Then Draymond got that bullshyt suspension and everything changed.
Nobody said they were the same. Just that there's a double standard going on here. Be honest "for once in your miserable life". The amount of lies and manipulative tactics you use is why it's IMPOSSIBLE to have a proper discussion with you.Yet they're really tryna run with this "both years were the same" rhetoric, as if losing Bogut's 12 mins for 3 games and Dray getting his dumbass suspended for 1 game is on equal ground with the situation Cleveland was in last season.
I think this team illustrates the problem with judging teams/players just based on stats. On paper 73-9 plus the ring would qualify them as one of the best of all time, but when you take the eye test into account they didn't measure up regardless of the ring. It's no coincidence that everyone arguing for the Wareiors being atg is just talking and accomplishments, shyt that you only see on paper. None of them are talking about their actual play on the court. I would expect the discussions here to be more in depth and analytical. It's disappointing that a lot of these posters are on some simple superficial stat boy shyt.I would've given them that for winning a chip the same season as winning 73. I could see your argument cause that's a lot off losses in the playoffs. But that ring would've made up for it. And other atg teams went 7 games during their run.
What they've accomplished over the last two seasons means they're an atg team. Obviously they're not ranked as highly if they were to win back-to-back titles, but they're still classified as an atg.But the 15-16 warriors didn't even win one chip. We all agree last years warriors wasn't an atg right?
You don't have to win multiple titles to be an atg team.
I think this team illustrates the problem with judging teams/players just based on stats. On paper 73-9 plus the ring would qualify them as one of the best of all time, but when you take the eye test into account they didn't measure up regardless of the ring. It's no coincidence that everyone arguing for the Wareiors being atg is just talking and accomplishments, shyt that you only see on paper. None of them are talking about their actual play on the court. I would expect the discussions here to be more in depth and analytical. It's disappointing that a lot of these posters are on some simple superficial stat boy shyt.