This is OBVIOUSLY Steph's era- not Lebron's.

[Edrees]

An era doesn't belong to one player. That's really stupid. Just say this era features both of htem as two of the premier players. Why do we have to pick one?

If the 80s was Magic and Bird era, you can clearly fit 2 players to an era. Saying 80s was only magic or only bird would be asinine.

I mean, do you also do this with coaches? Was this STEVE KERR ERA? Maybe it was the ERIC SPOELSTRA ERA?

Both have 4 Championships, LeBron imo is the better overall player but he had to jump teams and join/recruit superstars to win his 4 whereas Curry did it with 1 franchise. KD did come in for 2 of Curry’s tittle’s but LeBron also had Wade+Bosh, Kyrie+Love and Anthony Davis. Both players are trending in the opposite direction, this was a dismal season for LeBron who’s in serious jeopardy of dropping out of the top 3, whereas Curry had an amazing year and is about to break into the top 10. The next couple of years will be huge in determining who this Era truly belonged to.

LeBron is in serious jeopardy of dropping out of the top 3 because *checks notes* he missed the playoffs in his 19th season while dealing with injuries but still averaging 30 ppg on great efficiency. Good grief.

Imagine making a top 5 list but not putting anyone spots 2-5 it because nobody besides kareem met the requirement of winning a championship or being elite in their 19th season. These guys probably don't even have kareem as their GOAT.

LIke here's my top 10 goat list guys

1. Kareem
2. nobody
3. nobody
4. nobody
5. nobody
6. Michael Jordan
7. Lebron James.
8. Shaq or duncan or someone
9. etc

[ForeverTFC]

The argument for Steph only works if he has more chips, LeBron has done more in total besides championships, no need to cover that part. But if Steph can get 5 or 6, it's a legit conversation, especially if Steph can get 6 and LeBron ends at 4. If you can make better teams around Curry which results in more championships, then he's the better overall player even if LeBron has more individual accolades.

Everyone talks about Curry's gravity as being important, but what is often missed is that Steph's skills on offense allow for a team of defensive players to surround him. Because Steph is such a threat off ball and makes his defenders use energy, it allows for a team packed with defensive players in a way that can't be done with LeBron. It's why the Warriors can play Draymond, Looney, and GPII at the same time and it still works.

If the chips are the same LeBron is clearly better, if it's 5 we have a real argument, if it's 6 then it's Steph.

No one knows if Steph has 2 of his 4 rings without KD. Getting KD was a once in a lifetime opportunity due to the sudden increase in the cap. Even his 4th ring benefits from that as there is no other way to get Wiggins on to this team. We can't ignore that Curry played on one of the greatest (if not greatest) teams every assembled during the KD era while calling our Lebron for his Heatles era.

[DonaldSanders]

The argument for Steph only works if he has more chips, LeBron has done more in total besides championships, no need to cover that part. But if Steph can get 5 or 6, it's a legit conversation, especially if Steph can get 6 and LeBron ends at 4. If you can make better teams around Curry which results in more championships, then he's the better overall player even if LeBron has more individual accolades.

Everyone talks about Curry's gravity as being important, but what is often missed is that Steph's skills on offense allow for a team of defensive players to surround him. Because Steph is such a threat off ball and makes his defenders use energy, it allows for a team packed with defensive players in a way that can't be done with LeBron. It's why the Warriors can play Draymond, Looney, and GPII at the same time and it still works.

If the chips are the same LeBron is clearly better, if it's 5 we have a real argument, if it's 6 then it's Steph.

No one knows if Steph has 2 of his 4 rings without KD. Getting KD was a once in a lifetime opportunity due to the sudden increase in the cap. Even his 4th ring benefits from that as there is no other way to get Wiggins on to this team. We can't ignore that Curry played on one of the greatest (if not greatest) teams every assembled during the KD era while calling our Lebron for his Heatles era.

Sorry but this reasoning is a joke to me when you're talking about LeBron. LeGM orchestrated 2 super teams, the Cavs were absolutely a super team just like the Heat were. Kevin Love, Kyrie Irving, and LeBron are a super team, end of discussion.

If you're invalidating 2 of Curry's ring's, then LeGM just has 1. Personally I think they both have 4.

[Edrees]

The argument for Steph only works if he has more chips, LeBron has done more in total besides championships, no need to cover that part. But if Steph can get 5 or 6, it's a legit conversation, especially if Steph can get 6 and LeBron ends at 4. If you can make better teams around Curry which results in more championships, then he's the better overall player even if LeBron has more individual accolades.

Everyone talks about Curry's gravity as being important, but what is often missed is that Steph's skills on offense allow for a team of defensive players to surround him. Because Steph is such a threat off ball and makes his defenders use energy, it allows for a team packed with defensive players in a way that can't be done with LeBron. It's why the Warriors can play Draymond, Looney, and GPII at the same time and it still works.

If the chips are the same LeBron is clearly better, if it's 5 we have a real argument, if it's 6 then it's Steph.

No one knows if Steph has 2 of his 4 rings without KD. Getting KD was a once in a lifetime opportunity due to the sudden increase in the cap. Even his 4th ring benefits from that as there is no other way to get Wiggins on to this team. We can't ignore that Curry played on one of the greatest (if not greatest) teams every assembled during the KD era while calling our Lebron for his Heatles era.

Sorry but this reasoning is a joke to me when you're talking about LeBron. LeGM orchestrated 2 super teams, the Cavs were absolutely a super team just like the Heat were. Kevin Love, Kyrie Irving, and LeBron are a super team, end of discussion.

If you're invalidating 2 of Curry's ring's, then LeGM just has 1. Personally I think they both have 4.

LeGM is one of those terms that makes me laugh (in a good way) everytime I see it. doesn't matter how many times I've seen it. First person to come up with it is a savant.

[Rainwater]

Your take on Robert Horry is just proving my point, lol. My point was not to say that Robert Horry was some great basketball player because he has 9 rings. It was to provide context to your simplified idea that winning a title should be an overwhelming factor that hurts someone in a GOAT debate. As you clearly stated context is needed. And I believe the most important contextual point is that a title win is a TEAM accolade (dependent on how well the team is built) rather than an individual accolade; therefore, should be a lesser factor in the GOAT debate.

If championships are not an indicator then Wilt is the GOAT by far and it's not close.

EX: Steph won two of his 4 titles with 3 other All-Stars and the title was pretty much guaranteed. With this known fact, why should this play a role in how good Steph is? GSW had a good chance of winning the title with or without him.

This absolutely false. The Warriors were barely above .500 when it was KD, Klay, Dray. They did not have a good chance to win without Steph.

To your first point you are entitled to your opinion, I can't agree or disagree. Walt is one of the greatest to ever do it.

I highly disagree with your second point. A prime KD, Klay, and Green is title contending team.

[thebigbird]

The argument for Steph only works if he has more chips, LeBron has done more in total besides championships, no need to cover that part. But if Steph can get 5 or 6, it's a legit conversation, especially if Steph can get 6 and LeBron ends at 4. If you can make better teams around Curry which results in more championships, then he's the better overall player even if LeBron has more individual accolades.

Everyone talks about Curry's gravity as being important, but what is often missed is that Steph's skills on offense allow for a team of defensive players to surround him. Because Steph is such a threat off ball and makes his defenders use energy, it allows for a team packed with defensive players in a way that can't be done with LeBron. It's why the Warriors can play Draymond, Looney, and GPII at the same time and it still works.

If the chips are the same LeBron is clearly better, if it's 5 we have a real argument, if it's 6 then it's Steph.

No one knows if Steph has 2 of his 4 rings without KD. Getting KD was a once in a lifetime opportunity due to the sudden increase in the cap. Even his 4th ring benefits from that as there is no other way to get Wiggins on to this team. We can't ignore that Curry played on one of the greatest (if not greatest) teams every assembled during the KD era while calling our Lebron for his Heatles era.

Sorry but this reasoning is a joke to me when you're talking about LeBron. LeGM orchestrated 2 super teams, the Cavs were absolutely a super team just like the Heat were. Kevin Love, Kyrie Irving, and LeBron are a super team, end of discussion.

If you're invalidating 2 of Curry's ring's, then LeGM just has 1. Personally I think they both have 4.

If Love and Irving made the Cavs a super team then Curry got his first ring beating a super team missing 2 out of its 3 stars. Not very impressive.

[DonaldSanders]

If Love and Irving made the Cavs a super team then Curry got his first ring beating a super team missing 2 out of its 3 stars. Not very impressive.

I think it's fair to have different rankings to different titles as long as we're not playing the asterisk game. Kevin Love was 2nd team All-NBA the year before he joined the Cavs, that's a major loss along with Kyrie (3rd team All-NBA that year) missing 5/6 games. I'd put the 2015 Warriors title difficulty on a similar level to the 2019 Raptors... without thinking too hard, neither are in the top half of most difficult titles.

It's also why I was so attached to us winning the title this year, because all the attacks people make about Curry evaporate. The Celtics were picked more than the Warriors pre-Finals and everyone played, nobody sat any games. Williams was not 100% but some of the Warriors weren't either. The Celtics were absolutely a worthy opponent w/ the #1 regular season defense.

LeGM is one of those terms that makes me laugh (in a good way) everytime I see it. doesn't matter how many times I've seen it. First person to come up with it is a savant.

Haha, I 100% agree. I sometimes question typing it because I don't want to come off as a LeBron hater, but it's just too fun (and true) to type.

[ForeverTFC]

The argument for Steph only works if he has more chips, LeBron has done more in total besides championships, no need to cover that part. But if Steph can get 5 or 6, it's a legit conversation, especially if Steph can get 6 and LeBron ends at 4. If you can make better teams around Curry which results in more championships, then he's the better overall player even if LeBron has more individual accolades.

Everyone talks about Curry's gravity as being important, but what is often missed is that Steph's skills on offense allow for a team of defensive players to surround him. Because Steph is such a threat off ball and makes his defenders use energy, it allows for a team packed with defensive players in a way that can't be done with LeBron. It's why the Warriors can play Draymond, Looney, and GPII at the same time and it still works.

If the chips are the same LeBron is clearly better, if it's 5 we have a real argument, if it's 6 then it's Steph.

No one knows if Steph has 2 of his 4 rings without KD. Getting KD was a once in a lifetime opportunity due to the sudden increase in the cap. Even his 4th ring benefits from that as there is no other way to get Wiggins on to this team. We can't ignore that Curry played on one of the greatest (if not greatest) teams every assembled during the KD era while calling our Lebron for his Heatles era.

Sorry but this reasoning is a joke to me when you're talking about LeBron. LeGM orchestrated 2 super teams, the Cavs were absolutely a super team just like the Heat were. Kevin Love, Kyrie Irving, and LeBron are a super team, end of discussion.

If you're invalidating 2 of Curry's ring's, then LeGM just has 1. Personally I think they both have 4.

The Warriors had and currently still have 4 max players. You said you can make a better team around Curry which results in more championships. I was simply pointing out that the Warriors and Curry benefited from a once in a lifetime opportunity that, yes, even "LeGM" could not orchestrate.

I don't know what happens in those 2 years without KD. I can almost guarantee the Warriors don't win a championship this year without Wiggins.

[dribble1614]

it probably would've been if not for one lucky bounce or draymond green suspension in 2016. that one game alone altered legacies in unimaginable ways.

[Pachinko_]

So you have a playoff series to play, you don't know your roster or the opponent, but you can pick one player, who do you take? Peak Lebron or peak Steph? To me this the only question that matters, everything else is confusing and irrelevant.

Most people including me would pick Lebron. You could drop peak Lebron in any team and feel good that you're probably at least in the Finals. Steph needs a couple of things to fall right in his team before you can say the same.

[lessthanjake]

So you have a playoff series to play, you don't know your roster or the opponent, but you can pick one player, who do you take? Peak Lebron or peak Steph? To me this the only question that matters, everything else is confusing and irrelevant.

Most people including me would pick Lebron. You could drop peak Lebron in any team and feel good that you're probably at least in the Finals. Steph needs a couple of things to fall right in his team before you can say the same.

I’m actually not so sure the answer is LeBron.

LeBron has never won a title with as little talent as Steph just won a title with this year (and same can be said for the 2015 title to be honest—Klay and Draymond are just not as good as Wade/Bosh, Kyrie/Love, or AD). And when both constructed teams that had more talent than the rest of the league and were expected to win titles easily, it was Steph’s team that actually did dominate the league, while LeBron’s Heat team got a couple titles but did not dominate the league (losing in the finals twice, and having several game 7’s in their title runs). So there’s a decent argument that Steph has shown himself to be both a better floor raiser and better ceiling raiser when it comes to winning titles.

And I say that as someone who still ranks LeBron above Steph all time. LeBron was great way younger and will very likely end up having been great older too, so we are comparing players with wildly different length primes. And I think peak LeBron can drag legitimately bad teams to deep playoff runs more easily than Curry can. But the goal of the NBA is winning titles, and I’m not convinced LeBron can win a title with less than Steph can (both require a good team—you can’t win a title without that—but Steph has won a title with a less good team than LeBron ever has), nor do I believe at all that LeBron increases a stacked team’s dominance more than Steph does (since both had historically stacked teams, and Steph’s was easily more dominant, and it’s mostly due to his off-ball presence working better with another superstar than LeBron’s ball dominance does).

[WarriorGM]

So you have a playoff series to play, you don't know your roster or the opponent, but you can pick one player, who do you take? Peak Lebron or peak Steph? To me this the only question that matters, everything else is confusing and irrelevant.

Most people including me would pick Lebron. You could drop peak Lebron in any team and feel good that you're probably at least in the Finals. Steph needs a couple of things to fall right in his team before you can say the same.

I think the sentiment that a couple things falling right in terms of team construction could greatly influence Steph's team is fair. But I don't think your presentation of what matters is accurate. Is making finals consistently the goal or winning championships? For a team tasked with the question of who to pick with their number one pick do they go for the very solid player or the generational one with injury issues? Do you run a treadmill team back or tank and rebuild? There is no clear course in which to pick in those cases.

Also in the real world a franchise does have the ability to mold the team that would surround their player.

[Jfh20]

everyone got to eat in the lebron era. kawhi x2, curry x4, kd x2, dirk x1, giannis x1...... its just never ending man... how can you claim to be the GOAT and let all these other players win on your watch?? in the jordan years he was in his prime, no one ate. i literallly cannot list anyone who ate on jordans watch... i guess you can say someone won when he was retired for a year? maybe that could be your best argument against jordan/? that he took a year off in his prime? and the thing most dont realize, is lebron tried so hard to dominate this era, the miami heat and the not 1, not 2, not 3... and he just wasnt good enough to do it. Most wont admit it, but thats the truth. Lebron is just not as good as he ranks himself. one of the greats? yes, on jordan levels ? NO, never.

[Mr Loggins]

So you have a playoff series to play, you don't know your roster or the opponent, but you can pick one player, who do you take? Peak Lebron or peak Steph? To me this the only question that matters, everything else is confusing and irrelevant.

Most people including me would pick Lebron. You could drop peak Lebron in any team and feel good that you're probably at least in the Finals. Steph needs a couple of things to fall right in his team before you can say the same.

I’m actually not so sure the answer is LeBron.

LeBron has never won a title with as little talent as Steph just won a title with this year (and same can be said for the 2015 title to be honest—Klay and Draymond are just not as good as Wade/Bosh, Kyrie/Love, or AD).

flip side of this is that 2022 Celtics and 2015 cavs were both kinda “meh” finals opponents. Doesn’t take a super team to beat a big 3 of LeBron, Delly and Mozgov

[KodiakBear]

So you have a playoff series to play, you don't know your roster or the opponent, but you can pick one player, who do you take? Peak Lebron or peak Steph? To me this the only question that matters, everything else is confusing and irrelevant.

Most people including me would pick Lebron. You could drop peak Lebron in any team and feel good that you're probably at least in the Finals. Steph needs a couple of things to fall right in his team before you can say the same.

I’m actually not so sure the answer is LeBron.

LeBron has never won a title with as little talent as Steph just won a title with this year (and same can be said for the 2015 title to be honest—Klay and Draymond are just not as good as Wade/Bosh, Kyrie/Love, or AD). And when both constructed teams that had more talent than the rest of the league and were expected to win titles easily, it was Steph’s team that actually did dominate the league, while LeBron’s Heat team got a couple titles but did not dominate the league (losing in the finals twice, and having several game 7’s in their title runs). So there’s a decent argument that Steph has shown himself to be both a better floor raiser and better ceiling raiser when it comes to winning titles.

And I say that as someone who still ranks LeBron above Steph all time. LeBron was great way younger and will very likely end up having been great older too, so we are comparing players with wildly different length primes. And I think peak LeBron can drag legitimately bad teams to deep playoff runs more easily than Curry can. But the goal of the NBA is winning titles, and I’m not convinced LeBron can win a title with less than Steph can (both require a good team—you can’t win a title without that—but Steph has won a title with a less good team than LeBron ever has), nor do I believe at all that LeBron increases a stacked team’s dominance more than Steph does (since both had historically stacked teams, and Steph’s was easily more dominant, and it’s mostly due to his off-ball presence working better with another superstar than LeBron’s ball dominance does).

Lol what? The Warriors have the highest salary in the league with 2 all stars next to Steph along with Klay(who averaged 20 a game and likely would have been an all star had he played the whole year.) In 2015, Klay was an all star and Draymond Green was all nba first team defense(who would make the next 3 all star games).

Curry has always had 2 stars as teammates at minimum and often 3.

[KodiakBear]

everyone got to eat in the lebron era. kawhi x2, curry x4, kd x2, dirk x1, giannis x1...... its just never ending man... how can you claim to be the GOAT and let all these other players win on your watch?? in the jordan years he was in his prime, no one ate. i literallly cannot list anyone who ate on jordans watch... i guess you can say someone won when he was retired for a year? maybe that could be your best argument against jordan/? that he took a year off in his prime? and the thing most dont realize, is lebron tried so hard to dominate this era, the miami heat and the not 1, not 2, not 3... and he just wasnt good enough to do it. Most wont admit it, but thats the truth. Lebron is just not as good as he ranks himself. one of the greats? yes, on jordan levels ? NO, never.

Jordan has nothing to do with this conversation and yeah if you play 19 years you aren't going to win all the championships. Unless you are Bill Russell, other players are going "to eat" in your era.

[lessthanjake]

So you have a playoff series to play, you don't know your roster or the opponent, but you can pick one player, who do you take? Peak Lebron or peak Steph? To me this the only question that matters, everything else is confusing and irrelevant.

Most people including me would pick Lebron. You could drop peak Lebron in any team and feel good that you're probably at least in the Finals. Steph needs a couple of things to fall right in his team before you can say the same.

I’m actually not so sure the answer is LeBron.

LeBron has never won a title with as little talent as Steph just won a title with this year (and same can be said for the 2015 title to be honest—Klay and Draymond are just not as good as Wade/Bosh, Kyrie/Love, or AD).

flip side of this is that 2022 Celtics and 2015 cavs were both kinda “meh” finals opponents. Doesn’t take a super team to beat a big 3 of LeBron, Delly and Mozgov

I’ll give you that on the 2015 Cavs. But those Warriors also won 67 games and won the tougher conference. They were the best team in the league all season, so them winning the title really wasn’t some fluke. Meanwhile, I’d say the 2022 Celtics were much more than “meh” finals opponents. They had been extremely good since January, and I cannot find a single team in the play-by-play era (from 1996-1997 onwards) that has a most-played lineup that outscored opponents by as much per 100 possessions as the Celtics most-played lineup outscored opponents this year. Not even the 2017 Warriors, 1997 Bulls, 2008 Celtics, 2013 Heat, etc. Even the 2017 Warriors death lineup didn’t dominate teams as much as the 2022 Celtics’ starting lineup. Of course, that’s at least in part a function of a low sample size, but I find it difficult to call a team a “meh” opponent when their starting lineup had the most dominant regular season of any starting lineup in the last 25 years and then made the finals against a tough run of teams.

[Mr Loggins]

I’m actually not so sure the answer is LeBron.

LeBron has never won a title with as little talent as Steph just won a title with this year (and same can be said for the 2015 title to be honest—Klay and Draymond are just not as good as Wade/Bosh, Kyrie/Love, or AD).

flip side of this is that 2022 Celtics and 2015 cavs were both kinda “meh” finals opponents. Doesn’t take a super team to beat a big 3 of LeBron, Delly and Mozgov

I’ll give you that on the 2015 Cavs. But those Warriors also won 67 games and won the tougher conference. They were the best team in the league all season, so them winning the title really wasn’t some fluke. Meanwhile, I’d say the 2022 Celtics were much more than “meh” finals opponents. They had been extremely good since January, and I cannot find a single team in the play-by-play era (from 1996-1997 onwards) that has a most-played lineup that outscored opponents by as much per 100 possessions as the Celtics most-played lineup outscored opponents this year. Not even the 2017 Warriors, 1997 Bulls, 2008 Celtics, 2013 Heat, etc. Even the 2017 Warriors death lineup didn’t dominate teams as much as the 2022 Celtics’ starting lineup. Of course, that’s at least in part a function of a low sample size, but I find it difficult to call a team a “meh” opponent when their starting lineup had the most dominant regular season of any starting lineup in the last 25 years and then made the finals against a tough run of teams.

regular season and post season are different animals (Phoenix Suns?)

Boston caught teams dealing with pretty major injuries and squeaked through the eastern semi finals and finals….if Middletown played pretty good chance they take care of the Celts in the eastern semi’sz

Maybe not “meh” like the 2015 cavs, but certainly not one of the better finals teams in recent history

[lessthanjake]

So you have a playoff series to play, you don't know your roster or the opponent, but you can pick one player, who do you take? Peak Lebron or peak Steph? To me this the only question that matters, everything else is confusing and irrelevant.

Most people including me would pick Lebron. You could drop peak Lebron in any team and feel good that you're probably at least in the Finals. Steph needs a couple of things to fall right in his team before you can say the same.

I’m actually not so sure the answer is LeBron.

LeBron has never won a title with as little talent as Steph just won a title with this year (and same can be said for the 2015 title to be honest—Klay and Draymond are just not as good as Wade/Bosh, Kyrie/Love, or AD). And when both constructed teams that had more talent than the rest of the league and were expected to win titles easily, it was Steph’s team that actually did dominate the league, while LeBron’s Heat team got a couple titles but did not dominate the league (losing in the finals twice, and having several game 7’s in their title runs). So there’s a decent argument that Steph has shown himself to be both a better floor raiser and better ceiling raiser when it comes to winning titles.

And I say that as someone who still ranks LeBron above Steph all time. LeBron was great way younger and will very likely end up having been great older too, so we are comparing players with wildly different length primes. And I think peak LeBron can drag legitimately bad teams to deep playoff runs more easily than Curry can. But the goal of the NBA is winning titles, and I’m not convinced LeBron can win a title with less than Steph can (both require a good team—you can’t win a title without that—but Steph has won a title with a less good team than LeBron ever has), nor do I believe at all that LeBron increases a stacked team’s dominance more than Steph does (since both had historically stacked teams, and Steph’s was easily more dominant, and it’s mostly due to his off-ball presence working better with another superstar than LeBron’s ball dominance does).

Lol what? The Warriors have the highest salary in the league with 2 all stars next to Steph along with Klay(who averaged 20 a game and likely would have been an all star had he played the whole year.) In 2015, Klay was an all star and Draymond Green was all nba first team defense(who would make the next 3 all star games).

Curry has always had 2 stars as teammates at minimum and often 3.

Andrew Wiggins is not a real all star. He got voted in because of trolling by a K-Pop star’s fans. This is well understood. So, saying they have “2 all stars next to Steph along with Klay” is extremely misleading. Meanwhile, Klay is just coming off of being out for years with catastrophic injuries and is just objectively not an all star level player right now (and he never was a major superstar anyways—he has just one 20 PER season in his career and a 14.1 career playoff PER). Draymond is an all star, but for very idiosyncratic reasons—he is great defensively, but is objectively a significant offensive liability, and even had to get benched late in a finals game because of it. I feel pretty confident that Draymond Green would not have made an all star game in his career if he didn’t play with Steph Curry, but rather was on a random, average team.

In any event, even if you rate those guys a bit more highly than I do, compare those guys with the guys LeBron has actually won titles with. LeBron won two titles with Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh, one title with Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love, and one title with Anthony Davis. Those guys are all better than anyone on Steph’s teams in 2015 and 2022, and certainly the best teammate on each of those teams is indisputably better than anyone Steph had in 2015 or 2022. And in a league dominated by stars, that’s extremely significant. The title is almost always won by a team with a second-best player that is clearly better than Klay or Draymond, and that includes every single title won by LeBron.

[lessthanjake]

flip side of this is that 2022 Celtics and 2015 cavs were both kinda “meh” finals opponents. Doesn’t take a super team to beat a big 3 of LeBron, Delly and Mozgov

I’ll give you that on the 2015 Cavs. But those Warriors also won 67 games and won the tougher conference. They were the best team in the league all season, so them winning the title really wasn’t some fluke. Meanwhile, I’d say the 2022 Celtics were much more than “meh” finals opponents. They had been extremely good since January, and I cannot find a single team in the play-by-play era (from 1996-1997 onwards) that has a most-played lineup that outscored opponents by as much per 100 possessions as the Celtics most-played lineup outscored opponents this year. Not even the 2017 Warriors, 1997 Bulls, 2008 Celtics, 2013 Heat, etc. Even the 2017 Warriors death lineup didn’t dominate teams as much as the 2022 Celtics’ starting lineup. Of course, that’s at least in part a function of a low sample size, but I find it difficult to call a team a “meh” opponent when their starting lineup had the most dominant regular season of any starting lineup in the last 25 years and then made the finals against a tough run of teams.

regular season and post season are different animals (Phoenix Suns?)

Boston caught teams dealing with pretty major injuries and squeaked through the eastern semi finals and finals….if Middletown played pretty good chance they take care of the Celts in the eastern semi’sz

Maybe not “meh” like the 2015 cavs, but certainly not one of the better finals teams in recent history

Yes, regular season and postseason are different animals, but the Celtics also beat three major title contenders to get to the finals. Would the Bucks have won if Middleton wasn’t injured? Maybe. But the Celtics were also missing Robert Williams for most of the series against the Bucks (and he was clearly less healthy in the games he played in that series than he was even in the Finals). So if we assume Middleton isn’t injured, are we also assuming that Robert Williams is healthy too (or at least as healthy as he was in the finals)? If so, it seems pretty hard to assume the Bucks would win, since Robert Williams is a massive impact player for them. And if not, then it’s just an obviously unfair hypothetical.