RealGM

As an extension of my 21st century thread, I added up total wins (RS+PS) for every NBA team over the last 20 seasons. Mind you the Spurs won the Finals in 99 and were dominant throughout the 90s, none of which was included in the following data.

It probably won't surprise many people to learn that the Spurs came out on top in this experiment. What might/probably will surprise people is the margin of victory. To put things into perspective, the gap between the Spurs and #2 Mavs is greater than the gap between the Mavs and last place Knicks It's hard to even wrap my mind around that.

FWIW I excluded the Bobcats/modern Hornets because they only played 15 of the 20 seasons. If you extrapolate their average win total over that span it's actually less than the Knicks, but then this thread would be slightly less mind blowing.

Ugh, data input error on my part. Corrections have been made in the below win counts. Figures the Spurs were the only team I made a significant error on Obviously still very impressive, but the cool fact no longer holds. We'll have to settle for the gap between the Spurs/Mavs > Mavs/Sixers (#21 on the list).

Full results:

Ah, the glory days

The knicks are essentially last, so its a good list in showing franchise performance. The top ten teams have made good decisions, the bottom ten have not for the most part.

Pop is the goat, the fact that spurs major FA during his stint was LMA is mind blowing. Fans love to adress players moving from teams because that team couldn't pull a winning roster, if these players wanted to win, they would seek to play with coaches like Pop or winning rosters, not the opposite way.

Prime Duncan wouldn’t be effective in to modern game

HEAT33 wrote:Prime Duncan wouldn’t be effective in to modern game

say what now

HEAT33 wrote:Prime Duncan wouldn’t be effective in to modern game

Lulz

HEAT33 wrote:Prime Duncan wouldn’t be effective in to modern game

Well that's... not true.

Or was that the joke?

Imagine thinking one of the 10 greatest players of all time wouldn’t be effective in any era of basketball.

Lockdown504090 wrote:The knicks are essentially last, so its a good list in showing franchise performance. The top ten teams have made good decisions, the bottom ten have not for the most part.

I like that you used the Knicks as your barometer. "Knicks are last, checks out to me"

BVB24 wrote:Imagine thinking one of the 10 greatest players of all time wouldn’t be effective in any era of NBA basketball. Wild.

Moreover he was in the league 3 years ago, and won a Championship 5 years ago. Is that not modern?

HEAT33 wrote:Prime Duncan wouldn’t be effective in to modern game

Damn kids.

HEAT33 wrote:Duncan, Hakeem would be about effective today as Capela is

Edit) The font wasn't green the first time you SOB! Well played though.

HEAT33 wrote:Prime Duncan wouldn’t be effective in to modern game

Lol. Did you forget old man Duncan was 1st team all NBA in 2013? Don't act like 6 years ago isn't the "modern era"

I hope you're trolling tbh

amazing but they built from ground up so im not so surprised... now what they do next few years will be interesting.

Wow, that is incredible!

GeorgeMarcus wrote:As an extension of my 21st century thread, I added up total wins (RS+PS) for every NBA team over the last 20 seasons. Mind you the Spurs won the Finals in 99 and were dominant throughout the 90s, none of which was included in the following data.

It probably won't surprise many people to learn that the Spurs came out on top in this experiment. What might/probably will surprise people is the margin of victory. To put things into perspective, the gap between the Spurs and #2 Mavs is greater than the gap between the Mavs and last place Knicks It's hard to even wrap my mind around that.

FWIW I excluded the Bobcats/modern Hornets because they only played 15 of the 20 seasons. If you extrapolate their average win total over that span it's actually less than the Knicks, but then this thread would be slightly less mind blowing.

Full results:

Spoiler:

1. SAS - 1387
2. DAL - 1038
3. LAL - 1016
4. MIA - 1008
5. BOS - 985
6. HOU - 981
7. OKC - 958 (includes SEA teams)
8. IND - 947
9. UTA - 922
10. GSW - 915
11. POR - 913
12. DET - 903
13. CLE - 881
14. DEN - 870
15 (tie). PHO - 860
15 (tie). TOR - 860
17. NOP - 813 (includes pre-Bobcat CHA teams)
18. LAC - 803
19. ORL - 798
20. MIL - 797
21. PHI - 786
22. CHI - 784
23. SAC - 775
24. MEM - 765
25. ATL - 760
26. BKN - 759
27. WAS - 719
28. MIN - 714
29. NYK - 690
30. CHA - 488 (over 15 seasons)

And yet they could never repeat.

Regular season stuff is close to worthless.