Any team in history you'd bet against the 2017 Warriors in a 7-game series?

[Memories]

96 Bulls would also give that Warriors team a lot of problems. Pippen is pretty much the best you could ask for to guard Durant, and MJ would be all over Curry. And due to how petty MJ as a player…no, as a person is, he would make “personally” make sure to have Curry switched on him all the time, and make his life a living hell.

The X factor would be Klay Thompson and seeing if he can go off. Bulls also wouldn’t have to worry much about the Warriors bigs since they didn’t have anybody worthy of note. So Dennis Rodman would be getting rebounds for days.

[illuminati666]

Realistically... noone. The amount of shooting and star power that team had is just unmatched. You could do whatever on the offensive end, but on the other end they would just return with a Curry/Klay/KD 3 ptr. over 48 minutes, that amount of shooting adds up too much. I agree that the closest teams would be the Bulls w their perimeter defense, and the Kobe-Shaq Lakers because noone can gaurd Shaq. But end of the day im still taking the Warriors.

[ILOVEIT]

2000-2003s Lakers would destroyed them. They wouldn't have anyone who could match with Shaq and Kobe

LOL....here we go again....

So...a team with three two top ten hall of famers....one of the best two players (Klay) who is bigger than Kobe and top three shooter in history....David West...a big rugged tough SOB vet....

Oh...almost forgot one of the best defenders in history....

Sure....Kobe and Shaq would have not problem smashing that team. And Shaq would have zero problems guarding the best shooting team in history....ahuh.

[ConSarnit]

2001 Lakers would be interesting

Shaq is more dominant then Dwight but wanted to post how Green did against athletic post C.

Warriors would do Hack a Shaq late game

https://www.landofbasketball.com/games_between/draymond_green_vs_dwight_howard.htm

You do that and you create foul trouble for the majority of Warriors players, as well as putting the Lakers in a prime position to do whatever they want on offense with the Warriors being over the limit early.

Don’t forget, it’s not just Shaq either. The team can kill you on threes of their own when left open. Horry and Fisher especially for their clutch game, Rick Fox, etc. And of course, Kobe going silent assassin in a game like that where team will be so focused on Shaq, that before you can even blink, Kobe is already dropping 30 points without breaking much of a sweat.

Even when Shaq is on the bench, especially in late game like say, fouling out. Even younger Kobe does this:

Watch on YouTube

The Warriors have far better defenders to throw at Kobe than the 2000 Pacers (or the '01 76'ers). They have one of the best lineups of all-time for guarding star SG's: Iggy, Klay and Livingston.

The Lakers would never put up enough 3's to match GSW's offensive output. Grant was an offensive zero. Fox shot 32% from 3 in the playoffs. Almost every lineup the Lakers want to play allows GSW to double Shaq with impunity.

The style the Lakers wanted to play would never be able to match GSW's scoring. They'd lose due to volume: more shots & 3's vs 2's.

[ken6199]

You both mean the 2018 Rockets right?
2017 Rockets were the pre-CP3 team that got spanked by the Spurs without Kawhi in game 6.

Oops. You know what we meant though

Yep the 2018 Rockets were beast.

I am often confused on what to call a team based on 20xx-20yy season. Do we call them 20xx because the season starts in xx? or 20yy because they makes their memorable playoff run/finals in yy? I often go with yy not only because of the post season, but also all the MVP/all nba/etc awards are handed out in yy, so yy is more representative. Of course you can be more diligent and type the "xx-yy some team".

Well we've gone over the Scott Foster issue like thousands of times. I just wanted to say that, despite the obviously rigged games, the 18 Rockets had plenty of things to blame on themselves, and yes, you are responsible for your own shatty luck so I'd blame myself for bad luck as well (because you can't blame that on anyone else right). That said, it shows how underrated this 18 Rockets team is. On paper they are nowhere near looking like an all-time team talent wise - 6 man deep followed by Gerald freaking Green, but they are explicitly built and trained to play against the KD warriors.

[Warriorfan]

2001 Lakers would be interesting

Shaq is more dominant then Dwight but wanted to post how Green did against athletic post C.

Warriors would do Hack a Shaq late game

https://www.landofbasketball.com/games_between/draymond_green_vs_dwight_howard.htm

You do that and you create foul trouble for the majority of Warriors players, as well as putting the Lakers in a prime position to do whatever they want on offense with the Warriors being over the limit early.

Don’t forget, it’s not just Shaq either. The team can kill you on threes of their own when left open. Horry and Fisher especially for their clutch game, Rick Fox, etc. And of course, Kobe going silent assassin in a game like that where team will be so focused on Shaq, that before you can even blink, Kobe is already dropping 30 points without breaking much of a sweat.

Even when Shaq is on the bench, especially in late game like say, fouling out. Even younger Kobe does this:

Watch on YouTube

The Warriors have far better defenders to throw at Kobe than the 2000 Pacers (or the '01 76'ers). They have one of the best lineups of all-time for guarding star SG's: Iggy, Klay and Livingston.

The Lakers would never put up enough 3's to match GSW's offensive output. Grant was an offensive zero. Fox shot 32% from 3 in the playoffs. Almost every lineup the Lakers want to play allows GSW to double Shaq with impunity.

The style the Lakers wanted to play would never be able to match GSW's scoring. They'd lose due to volume: more shots & 3's vs 2's.

Kobe is the main scorer but not a great 3pt shooter at this time.

The support guys only take 1 or 2 3pointers a game.

Kobe will clamp down on one splash brother they probably don't guard Green key will how much KD goes off.

[Invictus88]

What era is the game being played in?

Go to youtube and look for some late 90's game. It might shock you and not in a good way

I was simply asking the OP what era he wanted this fantasy series to take place in; because the officiating and play style are completely different with whatever one you choose.

e.g. if you took the Golden State Warriors and threw them in a game in the 90s or 2000s they'd have to deal with WAY more physicality then they do now. The game was officiated completely different.

e.g. if you took a team like the 2004 Detroit Pistons and put them in today's game they would have to change their approach in a different manner. Their bread and butter was suffocating defense and slowing down pace; neither of which are very viable with today's officiating.

It doesn't make any team necessarily superior to the other. It just points out that context matters; thus my question.

Instead you give me some lazy answer about youtube; assuming that I wasn't alive and watching basketball in the 90s. Try again.

[Warriorfan]

2001 Lakers would be interesting

Shaq is more dominant then Dwight but wanted to post how Green did against athletic post C.

Warriors would do Hack a Shaq late game

https://www.landofbasketball.com/games_between/draymond_green_vs_dwight_howard.htm

You do that and you create foul trouble for the majority of Warriors players, as well as putting the Lakers in a prime position to do whatever they want on offense with the Warriors being over the limit early.

Don’t forget, it’s not just Shaq either. The team can kill you on threes of their own when left open. Horry and Fisher especially for their clutch game, Rick Fox, etc. And of course, Kobe going silent assassin in a game like that where team will be so focused on Shaq, that before you can even blink, Kobe is already dropping 30 points without breaking much of a sweat.

Even when Shaq is on the bench, especially in late game like say, fouling out. Even younger Kobe does this:

Watch on YouTube

The Warriors have far better defenders to throw at Kobe than the 2000 Pacers (or the '01 76'ers). They have one of the best lineups of all-time for guarding star SG's: Iggy, Klay and Livingston.

The Lakers would never put up enough 3's to match GSW's offensive output. Grant was an offensive zero. Fox shot 32% from 3 in the playoffs. Almost every lineup the Lakers want to play allows GSW to double Shaq with impunity.

The style the Lakers wanted to play would never be able to match GSW's scoring. They'd lose due to volume: more shots & 3's vs 2's.

Warriors actually had 6 guys who could play C
Green, Zaza. D West, Jevale MG Gee, Looney , J Bell

[wegotthabeet]

this team was getting smoked on their home court in game 1 of the western conference finals.

then they send in Zaza to purposely injury kawhi. so I would say the a healthy 2017 spurs

the 2019 Raptors are low key just a better version of that 2017 Spurs team.

[ReddoverKobe]

What era is the game being played in?

Go to youtube and look for some late 90's game. It might shock you and not in a good way

I was simply asking the OP what era he wanted this fantasy series to take place in; because the officiating and play style are completely different with whatever one you choose.

e.g. if you took the Golden State Warriors and threw them in a game in the 90s or 2000s they'd have to deal with WAY more physicality then they do now. The game was officiated completely different.

e.g. if you took a team like the 2004 Detroit Pistons and put them in today's game they would have to change their approach in a different manner. Their bread and butter was suffocating defense and slowing down pace; neither of which are very viable with today's officiating.

It doesn't make any team necessarily superior to the other. It just points out that context matters; thus my question.

Instead you give me some lazy answer about youtube; assuming that I wasn't alive and watching basketball in the 90s. Try again.

ah, the Jordan cult is melting down, nothing to see here. It's always funny the same people who claim to have watched games in the 90's pretend that it was "way more physical".

[ReddoverKobe]

96 Bulls would also give that Warriors team a lot of problems. Pippen is pretty much the best you could ask for to guard Durant, and MJ would be all over Curry. And due to how petty MJ as a player…no, as a person is, he would make “personally” make sure to have Curry switched on him all the time, and make his life a living hell.

The X factor would be Klay Thompson and seeing if he can go off. Bulls also wouldn’t have to worry much about the Warriors bigs since they didn’t have anybody worthy of note. So Dennis Rodman would be getting rebounds for days.

Ya, MJ never had problems with smaller and quicker guards or anything. The rest of that is flat our jordan cult stuff.

[Harry Garris]

The 2001 Lakers I feel like would have the best chance. Both in terms of match up problems on the offensive end and defensive problems caused by who the hell is guarding Shaq?


Kobe and Rick Fox, Brian Shaw, Ron Harper, Ty Lue...this team had some really good perimeter defenders. You swap out Hoarce Grant for Robert Horry in the starting line up for Match ups and I really like their chances.

Probably the best chance but Shaq would need to absolutely go off.

Yes the team did have good perimeter defenders for their era, but no one who had the skillset or experience to guard a modern pace and space offense.

We’re talking different rule sets though. Try that same team in this era with more physically allowed (Shaq would be called for many flagrants for his bully post offense alone) and you will likely see different results.

So to me, this question should be based within the same/similar era of basketball. It’s hard, if not nearly impossible to make good judgements based on different rule sets and physically allowed.

The physicality occurred mostly within the paint though. I struggle to understand exactly what it is about the NBA ruleset of the early 2000s that would slow down the Warrior's offense. You weren't allowed to hit 3 point shooters during their shooting motion in 2001, that was just as much of a foul back in that day as it is today.

The only actual rule changes that we're talking about here are the landing space rule, where putting your feet under a landing shooter is now deemed a shooting foul, and the hand checking rule. Which is the most overrated rule of all time and very poorly understood. Hand checking was a device that made it slightly easier for the guy defending the ball handler to stay with him on the perimeter, but hand checking has nothing to do with guys running around screens and getting open looks off the ball. Hell, it doesn't make the guy defending the ball handler impervious to getting screened either so it doesn't even necessarily help you to defend an off the dribble shooter coming off a screen.

The reason that teams didn't try to space out the floor back in that day wasn't because the rules didn't allow them to, it's because offense hadn't developed in that direction yet. Take Shaq and Kobe and give them modern role players who can help them space the floor and defend and they have a good shot at beating the 2017 Warriors. But Shaq and Kobe with a bunch of 2001-era role players surrounding them? Guys who couldn't shoot, and were used to playing slow, methodical basketball with 70 possessions and very little movement on defense? They'd need an oxygen mask after the first quarter playing at the pace of modern basketball.

I don't think they'd have much of a chance.

[rtiff68]

What era is the game being played in?

Go to youtube and look for some late 90's game. It might shock you and not in a good way

I was simply asking the OP what era he wanted this fantasy series to take place in; because the officiating and play style are completely different with whatever one you choose.

e.g. if you took the Golden State Warriors and threw them in a game in the 90s or 2000s they'd have to deal with WAY more physicality then they do now. The game was officiated completely different.

e.g. if you took a team like the 2004 Detroit Pistons and put them in today's game they would have to change their approach in a different manner. Their bread and butter was suffocating defense and slowing down pace; neither of which are very viable with today's officiating.

It doesn't make any team necessarily superior to the other. It just points out that context matters; thus my question.

Instead you give me some lazy answer about youtube; assuming that I wasn't alive and watching basketball in the 90s. Try again.

Not to butt in, but when was the last time you watched a game from a previous era? I only ask because memories are notoriously unreliable— I make it a point to watch classic games with a fair amount of regularity…

…and the difference in physicality between today and past eras is massively overstated, in my opinion. The most striking differences: the lack of team shooting, and team defenses essentially ignoring the 3pt line.

NFL football, in comparison, is WAY different today relative to previous eras.

Even though you watched the ‘90’s live, I’d be curious to hear your thoughts after rewatching one/some of those games now (of course, I’m assuming you haven’t, which very well might not be the case).

[GusT15]

this team was getting smoked on their home court in game 1 of the western conference finals.

then they send in Zaza to purposely injury kawhi. so I would say the a healthy 2017 spurs

the 2019 Raptors are low key just a better version of that 2017 Spurs team.

This sounds like an interesting premise,let's expand

PG-Parker/Mills/DJ Murray
SG-Danny Green/Ginobili/Forbes
SF-Leonard/Kyle Anderson/J Simmons
PF-Aldridge/David Lee/Davis Bertans
C-Pau Gasol/Dwayne Dedmon

vs

PG-Lowry/Vanvleet/Lyn
SG-Danny Green/Norman Powell
SF-Leonard/OG Anunoby
PF-Siakam/Ibaka
C-Marc Gasol/Boucher

So,imho Leonard and Green are the pretty much the same players,but they were both defending better in San Antonio (Green was also shooting better).
I obviously take 2017 Lowry over 2017 Tony.

Marc and Pau were pretty much the same player offensively,Mark was miles better defensively.

Aldridge and Siakam are completely different PFs.
I can't really compare them,Siakam was extremely better/versatile in defense and Aldridge was an unstoppable midrange offensive force.

I'll still pick the Spurs cause of Manu and Pop.
Oh,and cause i'm a Spurs fan....

[Guy]

2017 spurs (healthy), 2013 spurs, 2004 pistons

[picko]

The short answer is no. They had an extraordinarily talented roster with outstanding shooting and defense. They have a clear talent advantage over some of the other major contenders such as the Shaq / Kobe Lakers or the Jordan Bulls.

[rtiff68]

2013 spurs, 2004 pistons

Of all the championship teams since the merger, I actually think the 2004 Pistons would be in the running for having the lowest odds of victory against the 2017 Warriors.

It’s just a brutal match-up. They simply wouldn’t be able to score enough. The Lakers averaged 81.8 points in that series, were held under 90 in 4 of 5 games, and were held to 68 once.

You aren’t doing that to the 2017 Warriors in any era.

[ReddoverKobe]

Watch on YouTube

;ab_channel=WeGotGame

Bulls vs. Sonics game 1 of the finals if anyone is bored.

Bulls open the 2nd quarter with Pippen, Rodman, Kukoc, kerr and Randy Brown.

Also started watching a bit of the 2017 finals, forgetting David West was on that team. Would love to see Rodman try some cheap **** on him.

[MavsDirk41]

Go to youtube and look for some late 90's game. It might shock you and not in a good way

I was simply asking the OP what era he wanted this fantasy series to take place in; because the officiating and play style are completely different with whatever one you choose.

e.g. if you took the Golden State Warriors and threw them in a game in the 90s or 2000s they'd have to deal with WAY more physicality then they do now. The game was officiated completely different.

e.g. if you took a team like the 2004 Detroit Pistons and put them in today's game they would have to change their approach in a different manner. Their bread and butter was suffocating defense and slowing down pace; neither of which are very viable with today's officiating.

It doesn't make any team necessarily superior to the other. It just points out that context matters; thus my question.

Instead you give me some lazy answer about youtube; assuming that I wasn't alive and watching basketball in the 90s. Try again.

ah, the Jordan cult is melting down, nothing to see here. It's always funny the same people who claim to have watched games in the 90's pretend that it was "way more physical".

I watched 90s nba live on tv and i think it was more physical. How many times does a game get stopped today so the refs can review a common foul to see if it might be a flagrant? Could the 96 Bulls beat the 2017 Warriors? Maybe, maybe not. Defensively the Bulls match up well with them because of their length. The second three peat Bulls were a juggernaut defensively. And you can talk about Thompson, Iggy, Livingston and Green all you want but Jordan would get his. You think these guys are more physical then Xavier McDaniel, Anthony Mason, Gary Payton or Joe Dumars just to name a few?

[WillyJakkz]

Don't laugh. 2009 Magic. We were built for that.


Prime Dwight Howard surrounded by Hedo Rashard Lewis Courtney Lee Jameer Nelson JJ Redick Rafer Alston Michael Pietrus.

We won't outgun the Warriors from 3 but can keep pace with them and Dwight is shutting that interior driving down.

Dwight on Looney Zaza McGee Lew on KD Hedo on Draymond Livingston C Lee & Peaches on Klay Iggy Jameer Rafer JJ White Chocolate on Steph.

I really like that to be completely honest with you.