Top 20 teams of all time

[ambchang]

I don't have insider access to the top 50 teams, but the top 20 gallery is open content.

http://espn.go.com/nba/photos/gallery/_/id/13097489/image/6/15-2015-golden-state-warriors-top-20-greatest-nba-teams-ever

20: 93 Bulls
19: 89 Pistons
18: 65 Celtics
17: 60 Celtics
16: 01 Lakers
15: 15 Warriors
14: 14 Spurs
13: 83 6ers
12: 72 Lakers
11: 97 Bulls
10: 92 Bulls
9: 64 Celtics
8: 61 Celtics
7: 85 Lakers
6: 91 Bulls
5: 71 Bucks
4: 67 6ers
3: 87 Lakers
2: 86 Celtics
1: 96 Bulls

I don't know how anyone can rank the 15 Warriors above the 01 Lakers. I don't know how anyone can rank those 60s Celtics that high, either.

Once again, the 96 Bulls got overrated, 92 Bulls got dissed, 05 Spurs and 04 Pistons got dissed as well, same with 83 6ers (sidenote, people just love to underrate anything Moses related). 85 Lakers got overrated as well.

[Killakobe81]

I don't have insider access to the top 50 teams, but the top 20 gallery is open content.

http://espn.go.com/nba/photos/gallery/_/id/13097489/image/6/15-2015-golden-state-warriors-top-20-greatest-nba-teams-ever

20: 93 Bulls
19: 89 Pistons
18: 65 Celtics
17: 60 Celtics
16: 01 Lakers
15: 15 Warriors
14: 14 Spurs
13: 83 6ers
12: 72 Lakers
11: 97 Bulls
10: 92 Bulls
9: 64 Celtics
8: 61 Celtics
7: 85 Lakers
6: 91 Bulls
5: 71 Bucks
4: 67 6ers
3: 87 Lakers
2: 86 Celtics
1: 96 Bulls

I don't know how anyone can rank the 15 Warriors above the 01 Lakers. I don't know how anyone can rank those 60s Celtics that high, either.

Once again, the 96 Bulls got overrated, 92 Bulls got dissed, 05 Spurs and 04 Pistons got dissed as well, same with 83 6ers (sidenote, people just love to underrate anything Moses related). 85 Lakers got overrated as well.

85 Lakers were beasts ... one of the first teams I ever followed close. I'll take them vs. anyone tbh. Not saying they are better but they arent overrated. Only 86 Celts, 92 Bulls, 2001 Lakers and 83 Sixers and BadBoys are in the convo with that team.

[ambchang]

85 Lakers were beasts ... one of the first teams I ever followed close. I'll take them vs. anyone tbh. Not saying they are better but they arent overrated. Only 86 Celts, 92 Bulls, 2001 Lakers and 83 Sixers and BadBoys are in the convo with that team.

Not to me. Kareem was declining fast by 85, Magic really hasn't developed into the dominant force he became in the late 80s, and Worthy and Scott were still young. Cooper was great though, but hey, he was a role player.

[Mitch]

I don't see 14&15 being very deserving of a top 20 mention.

[horsielove]

I don't see 14&15 being very deserving of a top 20 mention.


http://www.beamng.com/images/imported/2014/05/ebec4eca-478f-403c-97ff-74b0bb953510.gif

[RD2191]

:lolThe 14 Spurs would wreck any team in NBA history.

[Franklin]

15' warriors are probably the shittiest NBA champion of all time tbh. Plus, the 11' Mavs could've beaten any team since the 1990s barring the Bulls led by Jordan imho.

[JoeTait75]

No disrespect to this year's Warriors, but they would not have been able to handle the 2001 Lake Show, who are laughably underrated at #16. I've watched NBA basketball for nearly three decades and the 2001 Lake Show is one of the five best teams I've ever seen, easy. Once Shaq and Kobe stopped feuding and got down to business that team was virtually unbeatable.

[Killakobe81]

No disrespect to this year's Warriors, but they would not have been able to handle the 2001 Lake Show, who are laughably underrated at #16. I've watched NBA basketball for nearly three decades and the 2001 Lake Show is one of the five best teams I've ever seen, easy. Once Shaq and Kobe stopped feuding and got down to business that team was virtually unbeatable.

This agree 100%. also fisher regaining health was huge as well. I know he gets hated on here. But adding his leadership and clutch 3's to Big shot BOb Foxy's defense and the dominance of SHaqobe ...that team was a true pleasure to watch especially come playoffs.

[da_suns_fan]

:lolThe 14 Spurs would wreck any team in NBA history.

Except the 15 Clippers who lost to the 15 Rockets who lost to the 15 Warriors.

[da_suns_fan]

The 01 Lakers lost ONE game in the playoffs. This included a curb-stomping of the 01 Spurs who had the best record in the league.

[baseline bum]

The only 60s team that belongs there is the 67 Sixers, and ranking the 72, 85, and 87 Lakers over the 01 Lakers is ridiculous. I'd take the 86 Celtics over the 96 Bulls in a second too.

[baseline bum]

Except the 15 Clippers who lost to the 15 Rockets who lost to the 15 Warriors.

That's O&47 talking.

[Killakobe81]

Not to me. Kareem was declining fast by 85, Magic really hasn't developed into the dominant force he became in the late 80s, and Worthy and Scott were still young. Cooper was great though, but hey, he was a role player.

you do realize he (kareem) was the MVP of the Finals? in Game 2 the Lakers ran all over the parquet, building a 21–6 lead they never lost and coming away with a series-tying 109–102 victory. They were fueled by Abdul‑Jabbar’s 30 points, 17 rebounds, eight assists and three blocks. at age 38 in the boston Garden. When Tim put up similar numbers in last year's playoff run some of you argued he was the best since MJ. In game 3, he had 26 points and 14 boards. Worthy had 29 in Game 3 I would rather have that from our center and the speed of the young guys ... it was like the Bulls first title team.

[baseline bum]

This agree 100%. also fisher regaining health was huge as well. I know he gets hated on here. But adding his leadership and clutch 3's to Big shot BOb Foxy's defense and the dominance of SHaqobe ...that team was a true pleasure to watch especially come playoffs.

Yeah, amazing how people forget just how good Fox was defensively that year. Crazy how quick his game fell off a cliff by 02 though, he was a shadow of himself just a year later. Fucking Fisher shooting 75% from the three point line in the WCF. And to think Aldridge reported he was getting ready to sign with the Spurs two summers before for the MLE. That Lakers team didn't look like they were going to be shit most of the season, but once Fisher returned those final 10 games or so they were unbeatable. I remember laughing at all my Laker fan friends who said Fisher being out was why they were so average at the time in those first 70 games of the season.

:pctoss

[da_suns_fan]

That's O&47 talking.

Thats defensiveness talking.

If they were sooo good, why did they lose in the first round with the exact same roster the next year? Who was hurt? Who retired?

[baseline bum]

Thats defensiveness talking.

If they were sooo good, why did they lose in the first round with the exact same roster the next year? Who was hurt? Who retired?

That's O&47 talking.

So are you pissed Nash's flop probably cost you the 07 title?

[Killakobe81]

Not to me. Kareem was declining fast by 85, Magic really hasn't developed into the dominant force he became in the late 80s, and Worthy and Scott were still young. Cooper was great though, but hey, he was a role player.

Also that 85 team was similar to the 2014 Spurs if you read this article (http://www.si.com/longform/2015/1985/nba-finals/). The tragedy of 1984 drove that 1985 team.

[baseline bum]

Also that 85 team was similar to the 2014 Spurs if you read this article (http://www.si.com/longform/2015/1985/nba-finals/). The tragedy of 1984 drove that 1985 team.

I don't know why the 87 team is consistently ranked above the 85 team. I'll take prime Lew and still effective McAdoo over an improved Byron Scott and young AC Green with old man Lew any day.

[Killakobe81]

I don't know why the 87 team is consistently ranked above the 85 team. I'll take prime Lew and still effective McAdoo over an improved Byron Scott and young AC Green any day.

He wasn't prime but you would get flashes of his greatness. Worthy and Scott were better players in 1987 but I would rather have Kareem closer to his prime and Green, Scott, Worthy and even Magic on young legs. Oh and McAdoo was still a effective scorer and Coop was near his defensive peak. Coop was the master at the chase down block long before LeBron. Coop used to spike dat shit like a volleyball ...

[baseline bum]

He wasn't prime but you would get flashes of his greatness. Worthy and Scott were better players in 1987 but I would rather have Kareem closer to his prime and Green, Scott, Worthy and even Magic on young legs. Oh and McAdoo was still a effective scorer and Coop was near his defensive peak. Coop was the master at the chase down block long before LeBron. Coop used to spike dat shit like a volleyball ...

Nigga played close enough to prime in 1985. Watching the tapes I can't tell a lot of difference between 85 Lew and 81 Lew other than his hair falling out.

[Killakobe81]

Nigga played close enough to prime in 1985. Watching the tapes I can't tell a lot of difference between 85 Lew and 81 Lew other than his hair falling out.

Dat hook was till money reason I edged Duncan over Kobe last year was because timmy reminded me of 85 Kareem. I couldnt argue anymore Duncan was better and my #2 big man. even as a "PF".

[ambchang]

you do realize he (kareem) was the MVP of the Finals? in Game 2 the Lakers ran all over the parquet, building a 21–6 lead they never lost and coming away with a series-tying 109–102 victory. They were fueled by Abdul‑Jabbar’s 30 points, 17 rebounds, eight assists and three blocks. at age 38 in the boston Garden. When Tim put up similar numbers in last year's playoff run some of you argued he was the best since MJ. In game 3, he had 26 points and 14 boards. Worthy had 29 in Game 3 I would rather have that from our center and the speed of the young guys ... it was like the Bulls first title team.

You can't cherry pick one game. In 85, Kareem can still score, but he couldn't rebound and defend like he used to. He averaged 26 ppg during the Finals, but "only" 22 and 8 in the entire playoffs and the regular season.

We are rating the team as a whole, not just through one game, or one even just the finals series.

I would take the 87, 80, or even the 88 Lakers over the 85 Lakers.

[ambchang]

Thats defensiveness talking.

If they were sooo good, why did they lose in the first round with the exact same roster the next year? Who was hurt? Who retired?

Do a little research will you?

[StrengthAndHonor]

Except the 15 Clippers who lost to the 15 Rockets who lost to the 15 Warriors.
:lol

[Killakobe81]

You can't cherry pick one game. In 85, Kareem can still score, but he couldn't rebound and defend like he used to. He averaged 26 ppg during the Finals, but "only" 22 and 8 in the entire playoffs and the regular season.

We are rating the team as a whole, not just through one game, or one even just the finals series.

I would take the 87, 80, or even the 88 Lakers over the 85 Lakers.

I didnt give you one ... I gave you two. And I watched that series and all those teams extensively except the 1980 squad because I was to young ..and I am telling you they were every bit as good or better than those other teams because we could run, defend and when all failed we had the "skyhook" ...

[Killakobe81]

Also Amb, yes I get you rate champions by factoring the regular season it's why the 2001 Lakers dont get as much credit as they should ...but you were discussing Kareem being in decline which was true but wouldnt his decline be more significant in 87 and 88? My point I woudl rather have 1985 Kareem over the 87-88 even if it means I get a prime Worthy or Scott.

The 2014 Spurs are much better than the 2007 squad as a team But I would rather have Timmy and Manu closer to prime than the all around play of the 2014 team if I was competing against Mj's Bulls, Shaqobe LAkers or 80's Celts/Lakers.

2014 Spurs were great amazing. But overrated on here ... but I get it.

[ambchang]

I didnt give you one ... I gave you two. And I watched that series and all those teams extensively except the 1980 squad because I was to young ..and I am telling you they were every bit as good or better than those other teams because we could run, defend and when all failed we had the "skyhook" ...

The 85 Lakers can score, no doubt, but I didn't see them as any dominating defensive force.

[The Gemini Method]

The 85' Lakers were a behemoth offensively and did enough to survive on the D side of things. Pretty good list. Though, I wasn't around for the 70s and 60s.

[Killakobe81]

The 85 Lakers can score, no doubt, but I didn't see them as any dominating defensive force.

No not dominate but the team was young outside of Kareem, McAdoo and Kupchak we could play passing lanes really well. Look I think 1987 might be better I just dont think 85 is as overrated as you stated. They are not top 5 but top 10 absolutely.

Best team I saw:

1985 and 1987 Lakers

1984 and 1986 Celts

2001 Lakers

1983 Sixers

1992 Bulls

1997 Bulls

1989 Pistons

In some order ...

[ambchang]

Also Amb, yes I get you rate champions by factoring the regular season it's why the 2001 Lakers dont get as much credit as they should ...but you were discussing Kareem being in decline which was true but wouldnt his decline be more significant in 87 and 88? My point I woudl rather have 1985 Kareem over the 87-88 even if it means I get a prime Worthy or Scott.

The 2014 Spurs are much better than the 2007 squad as a team But I would rather have Timmy and Manu closer to prime than the all around play of the 2014 team if I was competing against Mj's Bulls, Shaqobe LAkers or 80's Celts/Lakers.

2014 Spurs were great amazing. But overrated on here ... but I get it.

Yeah, I agree Kareem was a shell of his former self in 87 and 88, and likely would have retired if not for his losses in investments, but the 85 Kareem, though still All-NBA in caliber, is far removed from Kareem's prime.

Again, my issue with Kareem in 85 wasn't offense, it was purely defense. He couldn't rebound, he couldn't defend. And the thing is, Magic wasn't really taking in the reigns at that point yet, the offense still ran through Kareem at that point, whereas the 87 offense was built around Magic.

I saw the 87 team as the much well rounded team over the 85 version.

As for the Spurs, the 14 version is very overrated here, but I'd still take them over 07. I felt 05 was the best, and 03 was great based solely on the greatness of Duncan. 99 was the best ever on defense, but not even good offensively. The 14 team was very balanced, I'd say they are second best after the 05 Spurs of the 5 Spurs championship winning team.

[ambchang]

No not dominate but the team was young outside of Kareem, McAdoo and Kupchak we could play passing lanes really well.

When you count on the 85 Kareem and McAdoo (one of the greatest sieves in NBA history) for defense, you know you aren't that good.

The wing defense was pretty good though, Cooper was great, Magic has always been underrated defensively, and Scott as well.

[spurraider21]

Two best are 96 Bulls and 83 sixers imo

[Infinite_limit]

2015 Warriors vs 2012 Thunder

Who wins?

[jsandiego]

I think 2014 Spurs are the hardest to quantify because the lack of a superstar and all around team game. They won several games by double-digits in a historically tough Western Conference. Both offense and defense were incredible. Won the Finals by the biggest margin in history, and it was against a pretty good team. Won 62 games and still didn't play anyone more than 30 mpg.

I'm a big laker-hater by nature, but I agree that the 2001 team should be ranked higher. Once they all got healthy I think they ended the season 23-1, or something ridiculous like that.

[da_suns_fan]

Do a little research will you?

I did. They lost to the 2015 Clippers.

[baseline bum]

Yeah, I agree Kareem was a shell of his former self in 87 and 88, and likely would have retired if not for his losses in investments, but the 85 Kareem, though still All-NBA in caliber, is far removed from Kareem's prime.

Again, my issue with Kareem in 85 wasn't offense, it was purely defense. He couldn't rebound, he couldn't defend. And the thing is, Magic wasn't really taking in the reigns at that point yet, the offense still ran through Kareem at that point, whereas the 87 offense was built around Magic.

I saw the 87 team as the much well rounded team over the 85 version.

As for the Spurs, the 14 version is very overrated here, but I'd still take them over 07. I felt 05 was the best, and 03 was great based solely on the greatness of Duncan. 99 was the best ever on defense, but not even good offensively. The 14 team was very balanced, I'd say they are second best after the 05 Spurs of the 5 Spurs championship winning team.

05 was the best Spurs team on paper, but with Duncan's injured ankles no way I'd take them over the 14 team.

[baseline bum]

Two best are 96 Bulls and 83 sixers imo

I think I'd take the 86 Celtics over the 83 Sixers, such a ridiculous frontcourt with Bird, McHale, Parish, Walton. The 87 team took such a hit with Greg Kite having to play lots of Walton's and McHale's minutes though. Damn if that was Len Bias taking Greg Kite's minutes instead though.

[ElNono]

This agree 100%. also fisher regaining health was huge as well. I know he gets hated on here. But adding his leadership and clutch 3's to Big shot BOb Foxy's defense and the dominance of SHaqobe ...that team was a true pleasure to watch especially come playoffs.

The only guys here that hate on Fish leadership are Lakerfans themselves, tbh...

[spurraider21]

I think I'd take the 86 Celtics over the 83 Sixers, such a ridiculous frontcourt with Bird, McHale, Parish, Walton. The 87 team took such a hit with Greg Kite having to play lots of Walton's and McHale's minutes though. Damn if that was Len Bias taking Greg Kite's minutes instead though.
talent wise, maybe. but that sixers team gelled immediately with moses on board, won 65 games, and obliterated the postseason. fo fo fo (almost)... including a sweep of the defending champ lakers

[da_suns_fan]

Do a little research will you?

I looked it up. They got bounced in the first round.

Paper champs.

[baseline bum]

talent wise, maybe. but that sixers team gelled immediately with moses on board, won 65 games, and obliterated the postseason. fo fo fo (almost)... including a sweep of the defending champ lakers

Worthy broke his leg and was out for the Finals.

[baseline bum]

I looked it up. They got bounced in the first round.

Paper champs.

Nothing says weak like setting the Finals record for average point differential against the two time defending champions. Where do you think the 07 Suns would have stacked on that top 20 list if Nash hadn't flopped in Game 4?

[ambchang]

I did. They lost to the 2015 Clippers.


Thats defensiveness talking.

If they were sooo good, why did they lose in the first round with the exact same roster the next year? Who was hurt? Who retired?

You seemed confused about what you are asking for.

[ambchang]

I did. They lost to the 2015 Clippers.


I looked it up. They got bounced in the first round.

Paper champs.

No need to respond to the same quote twice.

Are you hung over? You seemed disoriented.

[whitemamba]

2014 Spurs,??? Lmao for fucks sake, this site is getting worse every day.

[Caltex2]

15' warriors are probably the shittiest NBA champion of all time tbh. Plus, the 11' Mavs could've beaten any team since the 1990s barring the Bulls led by Jordan imho.

The Warriors looked too vulnerable far too many times in every series, even against the Pelicans. They're up there but not too far up there.

And the '72 Lakers are way underrated on that list.

[da_suns_fan]

You seemed confused about what you are asking for.

Why did they get bounced in the first round the next season? Did they lose a key player from the previous year?

[da_suns_fan]

Nothing says weak like setting the Finals record for average point differential against the two time defending champions. Where do you think the 07 Suns would have stacked on that top 20 list if Nash hadn't flopped in Game 4?

Nothing says weak like losing in the first round with the same squad.

Which other "top 20 team" lost in the first round with same roster the next season?

[baseline bum]

Why did they get bounced in the first round the next season? Did they lose a key player from the previous year?

But nothing says weak like setting the Finals record for average point differential against the two time defending champions. Where do you think the 07 Suns would have stacked on that top 20 list if Nash hadn't flopped in Game 4?

[baseline bum]

Nothing says weak like losing in the first round with the same squad.

Which other "top 20 team" lost in the first round with same roster the next season?

Where do you think the 07 Suns would have stacked on that top 20 list if Nash hadn't flopped in Game 4?

[gnsf0946]

Why did they get bounced in the first round the next season? Did they lose a key player from the previous year?

I feel like they lost motivation (Pop shitting the bed and Splitter being injured was also a part).

Motivation to me was always their biggest problem when it came to repeating.

[baseline bum]

Nothing says weak like losing in the first round with the same squad.

Which other "top 20 team" lost in the first round with same roster the next season?

1983 Sixers, to a 45 win Nets team son. And the Spurs lost to a 56 win Clippers team that had homecourt. So where do you think the 07 Suns would have stacked on that top 20 list if Nash hadn't flopped in Game 4?

[da_suns_fan]

I feel like they lost motivation (Pop shitting the bed and Splitter being injured was also a part).

Motivation to me was always their biggest problem when it came to repeating.

If thats true, how "motivated" were the 14 Heat after winning two titles and making their fourth straight trip to the Finals?

[gnsf0946]

If thats true, how "motivated" were the 14 Heat after winning two titles and making their fourth straight trip to the Finals?

Bron was very motivated. Can't say about the rest of the team. 2014 Heat was pretty mediocre, got to the finals cause East Conference.

[baseline bum]

If thats true, how "motivated" were the 14 Heat after winning two titles and making their fourth straight trip to the Finals?

1983 Sixers, to a 45 win Nets team son. And the Spurs lost to a 56 win Clippers team that had homecourt. So where do you think the 07 Suns would have stacked on that top 20 list if Nash hadn't flopped in Game 4?

[da_suns_fan]

1983 Sixers, to a 45 win Nets team son. And the Spurs lost to a 56 win Clippers team that had homecourt. So where do you think the 07 Suns would have stacked on that top 20 list if Nash hadn't flopped in Game 4?

:lol

The 01 Lakers followed up their championship by beating a 58 win Spurs and a 61 win Kings (whom had homecourt).

[baseline bum]

:lol

The 01 Lakers followed up their championship by beating a 58 win Spurs and a 61 win Kings (whom had homecourt).

So where do you think the 07 Suns would have stacked on that top 20 list if Nash hadn't flopped in Game 4? Also do the 1983 Sixers suck?

[da_suns_fan]

Bron was very motivated. Can't say about the rest of the team. 2014 Heat was pretty mediocre, got to the finals cause East Conference.

That sounds right.

[Malik Hairston]

A poster on RealGm calculated the offensive/defensive rating differential for the playoffs from 2015 to 2000 + the Dad Killer teams, decent list IMO, but like most of these lists, it doesn't factor the level of competition..

1. 2001 LAL +57.9
2. 1996 CHI +46.9
3. 1991 CHI +44.4
4. 2014 SAS +43.1
5. 2013 MIA +35.7
6. 1998 CHI +34.8
7. 1992 CHI +34.1
8. 2012 MIA +33.6
9. 1993 CHI +33.4
10. 2015 GSW +32.7
11. 2009 LAL +32.4
12. 2004 DET +31.6
13. 2011 DAL +29.5
14. 1997 CHI +27.2
15. 2003 SAS +24.4
16. 2008 BOS +24.2
17. 2005 SAS +21.3
18. 2007 SAS +21.0
19. 2002 LAL +20.6
20. 2006 MIA +17.4
21. 2000 LAL +12.7
22. 2010 LAL +8.3

98 Bulls were one of the worst title teams of my lifetime, though, based on competition..not surprised that the 2010 Lakers are last, too, based on both quality and competition..

[da_suns_fan]

So where do you think the 07 Suns would have stacked on that top 20 list if Nash hadn't flopped in Game 4? Also do the 1983 Sixers suck?

I guess we'll never know. Doesnt pay to flop, does it?

[baseline bum]

I guess we'll never know. Doesnt pay to flop, does it?

Also do the 1983 Sixers suck?

[da_suns_fan]

Also do the 1983 Sixers suck?

I dont know..but I hope you take comfort in the fact that the Spurs werent completely alone in their face-plant.

[baseline bum]

I dont know..but I hope you take comfort in the fact that the Spurs werent completely alone in their face-plant.

Don't puss out here son.

[da_suns_fan]

Don't puss out here son.

Are you suggesting the 82 Sixers were exposed the same way the Spurs were exposed? Who cares?

[baseline bum]

Are you suggesting the 82 Sixers were exposed the same way the Spurs were exposed? Who cares?

Are you saying the 83 Sixers weren't top 20? How about the 85 Lakers who lost 1-4 to a lousy 51 win Rockets team despite having homecourt and no injuries the next season?

[ambchang]

Why did they get bounced in the first round the next season? Did they lose a key player from the previous year?

Why are you changing your question?

[da_suns_fan]

Are you saying the 83 Sixers weren't top 20? How about the 85 Lakers who lost 1-4 to a lousy 51 win Rockets team despite having homecourt and no injuries the next season?

In the CONFERENCE finals. And to the eventual champions.

Your Spurs couldnt even make it to the second round. And lost to a team who lost to the champs.

Thus, they couldnt have been THAT good in 14, yes?

[Malik Hairston]

^^ That's a really strange argument, tbh:lol..what's your theory as to why they fell off during the regular season? It wasn't exclusive to the playoffs, they struggled all year, there's a reason they were a 6 seed after having one of the most dominant playoff runs of all-time in 2014..

[apalisoc_9]

:lol 60's and 70's team making the list....

[da_suns_fan]

^^ That's a really strange argument, tbh:lol..what's your theory as to why they fell off during the regular season? It wasn't exclusive to the playoffs, they struggled all year, there's a reason they were a 6 seed after having one of the most dominant playoff runs of all-time in 2014..

The level of competition was much higher this year. The Spurs are paper champs.

Right place, right time.

[apalisoc_9]

Some no name chinese team would probably win 90% of their games in the 70's and 100% of their games in the 60's...

:lol

[Malik Hairston]

2015 Champs' SRS competition:

2. Clippers 6.8
3. Spurs 6.3
4. Hawks 4.75(litany of injuries)
5. Blazers 4.4(lost Matthews)
6. Cavs 4.1(lost Irving and Love)
7. Rockets 3.8(lost Beverley and Montejunas)
8. Grizzlies 3.6(lost Conley for a chunk of games)


2014 SRS:

2. Clippers 7.3
3. Thunder 6.7(lost Ibaka for a chunk of games)
4. Warriors 5.2(lost Bogut)
5. Rockets 5.1
6. Blazers 4.4
7. Heat 4.2
8. Pacers 3.6

2014 was more competitive, tbh, even excluding injuries..

[da_suns_fan]

The level of competition in this year's playoffs was probably the worst it has been in a long time, tbh:lol..

Regular season is a strange argument, since it's well known that teams don't have time to game plan during the season..weird argument, so you're saying the entire league adjusted to Tony Parker and Ginobili in just a matter of months?

Then why did the Spurs get bounced in the first round? Their drop off was so sharp they went from "dominating" tough competition to getting smacked by weaker competition in one summer?

[namlook]

14 Spurs and 15 Warriors were a better team than the 01 Lakers? That's not even open for discussion. The 01 Lakers obliterated everyone in the playoffs and they were one play away from perfection The one game they lost was in OT.

The 72 Lakers won 69 games, 33 in a row, and a title obviously, and they are ranked 12th?

[Malik Hairston]

Then why did the Spurs get bounced in the first round? Their drop off was so sharp they went from "dominating" tough competition to getting smacked by weaker competition in one summer?

Most of the players on the team fell off a cliff during the regular season, it didn't really have much to do with the Clippers, it was the case all season:lol..other than Leonard and Green and maybe Duncan, literally every player on the saw a significant decline from the previous year during the regular season..

There isn't really a precedent for the Spurs, they were coming off 3 straight runs into end of May/mid-June with 3/4 of their core being past their primes, they were going to run out of gas at some point..the only comparable team from mileage/status was probably the 1998 Bulls, and their Finals opponent(Utah) was virtually the same team as the Clippers' team that the Spurs lost to, this season, according to the metrics..

I just find it strange that you think they went from having one of the best playoff runs in league history to the 6th(!!) seed in just a matter of months, simply because the competition got tougher:lol..

[hitmanyr2k]

Most of the players on the team fell off a cliff during the regular season, it didn't really have much to do with the Clippers, it was the case all season:lol..other than Leonard and Green and maybe Duncan, literally every player on the saw a significant decline from the previous year during the regular season..

There isn't really a precedent for the Spurs, they were coming off 3 straight runs into end of May/mid-June with 3/4 of their core being past their primes, they were going to run out of gas at some point..the only comparable team from mileage/status was probably the 1998 Bulls, and their Finals opponent(Utah) was virtually the same team as the Clippers' team that the Spurs lost to, this season, according to the metrics..

I just find it strange that you think they went from having one of the best playoff runs in league history to the 6th(!!) seed in just a matter of months, simply because the competition got tougher:lol..

The Spurs are hardly comparable to the Bulls lol. Most of the players on the Spurs averaged 30 minutes or less playing time for God knows how many seasons with Pop micro-managing minutes and your stars got to even take nights off on back to backs. The Bulls stars were not only playing close to 40 minutes a game they sure as hell weren't taking nights off for the hell of it. The Spurs got bounced because they relied heavily on the 3 point shot (more often than ever) and teams that rely on that shot are unreliable. You live by it and die by it. The Spurs got hot last year at the right time, not so much this year.

[baseline bum]

In the CONFERENCE finals. And to the eventual champions.

Your Spurs couldnt even make it to the second round. And lost to a team who lost to the champs.

Thus, they couldnt have been THAT good in 14, yes?

They lost 4-1 to a shit team.

[baseline bum]

^^ That's a really strange argument, tbh:lol..what's your theory as to why they fell off during the regular season? It wasn't exclusive to the playoffs, they struggled all year, there's a reason they were a 6 seed after having one of the most dominant playoff runs of all-time in 2014..

I don't get his argument. Apparently the 83 Sixers were paper champs.

[baseline bum]

The level of competition was much higher this year. The Spurs are paper champs.

Right place, right time.

So the difference between a paper champ like the 2014 Spurs and a real top 20 champ like the 1985 Lakers is the Spurs lost in the playoffs to a 56 win team in 7 next year while the Lakers beat a 35 win team and a 44 win team before losing to a 51 win team in 5. So if the Spurs would have beaten the Hornets and then the Pelicans in a series before losing to the Clippers, they could be a real top 20 champ? And where do you rank the 1983 Sixers?

[baseline bum]

In the CONFERENCE finals. And to the eventual champions.

Your Spurs couldnt even make it to the second round. And lost to a team who lost to the champs.

Thus, they couldnt have been THAT good in 14, yes?

The Rockets won the 1986 championship? Are all people in Phoenix this ignorant about NBA history?

[Clipper Nation]

The level of competition was much higher this year. The Spurs are paper champs.

Right place, right time.
You threw a parade for second place :lmao

[baseline bum]

You threw a parade for second place :lmao

He thought the Rockets won the 86 title, so he probably thought they won in 93.

[baseline bum]

The 72 Lakers won 69 games, 33 in a row, and a title obviously, and they are ranked 12th?

Because West had to wait Russell's career out to actually win one?

[da_suns_fan]

The Rockets won the 1986 championship? Are all people in Phoenix this ignorant about NBA history?

My mistake. The Lakers didnt lose to the eventual champions...but they did do a hell of a lot better than the 2015 Spurs.

[da_suns_fan]

You threw a parade for second place :lmao

Butthurt forum.

Hows Harden's jizz taste?

[Clipper Nation]

Butthurt forum.

Hows Harden's jizz taste?
How's Duncan's jizz taste? Your whole franchise is literally his personal bitch :lol

[baseline bum]

My mistake. The Lakers didnt lose to the eventual champions...but they did do a hell of a lot better than the 2015 Spurs.

By beating the 1986 equivalent to the Hornets and then the 1986 equivalent to the Pelicans and then getting destroyed by the 1986 equivalent to the Blazers?

[da_suns_fan]

By beating the 1986 equivalent to the Hornets and then the 1986 equivalent to the Pelicans and then getting destroyed by the 1986 equivalent to the Blazers?

Stings, doesnt it?

[baseline bum]

Butthurt forum.

Hows Harden's jizz taste?

Blowing that chance in 07 has gotten you even more butthurt than cubby, with your arbitrary standards for paper champs and all.

[da_suns_fan]

How's Duncan's jizz taste? Your whole franchise is literally his personal bitch :lol

Have you resigned to calling Chris Paul "daddy"?

I think you owe it to him.

[baseline bum]

Stings, doesnt it?

Were you crying more in the 14 Finals or 07 Finals?

[Clipper Nation]

Have you resigned to calling Chris Paul "daddy"?

I think you owe it to him.
Why? He choked in the playoffs again like I said he would.

Has Goran Dragic played himself out of the league yet? Did the Suns win it all in 2008?

[baseline bum]

Why? He choked in the playoffs again like I said he would.

Has Goran Dragic played himself out of the league yet? Did the Suns win it all in 2008?

This guy doesn't know shit about the NBA. Thought the Spurs were the only top 20 championship team to lose in the first the next year. Thought the Rockets won the title in 86. Thought Jared Dudley was better than Carmelo Anthony. The comically bad basketball takes never stop with him.

[m>s]

Sun fan does have a point, the 2014 Spurs caught lightning in a bottle because a truly dominant team wouldn't follow it up with a first round exit.

[da_suns_fan]

Sun fan does have a point, the 2014 Spurs caught lightning in a bottle because a truly dominant team wouldn't follow it up with a first round exit.

Exactly :bobo

[da_suns_fan]

Why? He choked in the playoffs again like I said he would.

Has Goran Dragic played himself out of the league yet? Did the Suns win it all in 2008?

I think I might change my sig to Paul's legendary shot just to troll your ass :lol

[baseline bum]

I think I might change my sig to Paul's legendary shot just to troll your ass :lol

Garbage Jared Dudley video is already a good enough troll tbh.

[barbacoataco]

The 01 Lakers lost ONE game in the playoffs. This included a curb-stomping of the 01 Spurs who had the best record in the league.

Yeah I would put that team much higher. Kind of a pointless argument because are you talking about the best on paper, as a collection of talent, or is it the team that was playing the highest level of basketball as a team. And after that is it regular season and playoffs, or just playoffs? Another problem is the rules have changed and some teams would be more or less successful in different eras based on the way they officiate. That Rodman era Pistons would struggle under today's no touch rules, while the 15 Warriors would be hampered by a old school defense that could get physical with them.

[Clipper Nation]

I think I might change my sig to Paul's legendary shot just to troll your ass :lol

:lol Yeah, his "legendary" first round of the playoffs shot. How'd he do in the second round again? Oh, that's right, he blew a 3-1 lead and a 19-point lead at home and was petrified to shoot the ball from the 4th quarter for Game 6 until garbage time of Game 7. Might I add that he got punked by ancient fossils like Jason Terry and Pablo Prigioni. He's still never been past the second round of the playoffs.

Leave it to a Suns fan to idolize a loser, though. If Choke Paul had hit that same first-round shot against the Spurs in a Suns uniform, they literally would have thrown a parade downtown :lmao

[da_suns_fan]

:lol Yeah, his "legendary" first round of the playoffs shot. How'd he do in the second round again? Oh, that's right, he blew a 3-1 lead and a 19-point lead at home and was petrified to shoot the ball from the 4th quarter for Game 6 until garbage time of Game 7. Might I add that he got punked by ancient fossils like Jason Terry and Pablo Prigioni. He's still never been past the second round of the playoffs.

Leave it to a Suns fan to idolize a loser, though. If Choke Paul had hit that same first-round shot against the Spurs in a Suns uniform, they literally would have thrown a parade downtown :lmao

Let it go, bro!

You need to admit you were wrong and move on. Find someone else to be completely wrong about.

The end.

[baseline bum]

Let it go, bro!

You need to admit you were wrong and move on. Find someone else to be completely wrong about.

The end.

Are the 83 Sixers a top 20 team alltime?

[Malik Hairston]

The Spurs are hardly comparable to the Bulls lol. Most of the players on the Spurs averaged 30 minutes or less playing time for God knows how many seasons with Pop micro-managing minutes and your stars got to even take nights off on back to backs. The Bulls stars were not only playing close to 40 minutes a game they sure as hell weren't taking nights off for the hell of it. The Spurs got bounced because they relied heavily on the 3 point shot (more often than ever) and teams that rely on that shot are unreliable. You live by it and die by it. The Spurs got hot last year at the right time, not so much this year.

The Spurs lost for 2 major reasons:

1. 2 of their top 3 highest-usage players and only 2 perimeter playmakers declined significantly(age/mileage), with one of them(Parker) having one of the worst series' in playoffs history

2013-2014 Parker, while only being an average player, still put up a 15.8 PER, 17.4 PPG on 53% True Shooting and 4.8 APG
2014-2015 Parker: 6.5 PER(:wow), 10.8 PPG on 39% True Shooting(:wow) and 3.6 APG

2013-2014 Ginobili: 20.3 PER, 14.3 PPG on 59% TS and 4.1 APG
2014-2015 Ginobili: 17 PER, 8 PPG on 53% TS and 4.6 APG

2. They had the #1 5-man unit in the NBA and the best defense in the NBA, this year, in Parker/Green/Leonard/Duncan/Splitter..Splitter could barely walk in the playoffs and was horrendous after being outstanding in the 2014 playoffs, which essentially killed the Spurs' defense, which was evident in the Clippers series..replacing a statistically elite defender with 2 poor defensive bigs in Diaw and Baynes is what you get..

Splitter was one of the 3 best Spurs in all on/off metrics in both the 2013 and 2014 playoff runs, but became a statistical net negative in the 2015 playoffs with his calf injury

[Clipper Nation]

Let it go, bro!

You need to admit you were wrong and move on. Find someone else to be completely wrong about.

The end.
So Choke Paul was clutch in the playoffs this year and won a ring?

[Tuddy]

:lolThe 14 Spurs would wreck any team in NBA history.

This is true. They played at a higher level in the Finals than any basketball has ever been played

[Malik Hairston]

Sun fan does have a point, the 2014 Spurs caught lightning in a bottle because a truly dominant team wouldn't follow it up with a first round exit.

It's true that they caught lightning in a bottle, they shot better than any team in playoffs history(they shot a higher % on contested shots than uncontested, which is ridiculous), they played way above their heads, but how does that change what they actually did during the run?

[Infinite_limit]

This is true. They played at a higher level in the Finals than any basketball has ever been played
Didn't even Sweep the series. What gives

[m>s]

It's true that they caught lightning in a bottle, they shot better than any team in playoffs history(they shot a higher % on contested shots than uncontested, which is ridiculous), they played way above their heads, but how does that change what they actually did during the run?

it doesn't change what they did, and that was play way over their heads with a great system everything just kind of fell into place. Don't think they'd beat some of the teams on this list because things tend to average out over time especially the better the competition. It's just like how anyone can get hot and hit some shots but it's a different thing to make them consistently against great defense.

[Silver&Black]

Didn't even Sweep the series. What gives

They destroyed the back2back defending champions. Is this really that hard to comprehend?

[FkLA]

The '99 Spurs started off 6-8 and ended up finishing the regular season 31-5. Then went 15-2 in the playoffs.

I've always thought they're criminally underrated tbh.

[Caltex2]

I'm not one of those people that like to apply an asterisk, the Spurs were clearly the best team that year but it'd have been interesting to see if they would have been the best over the course of 82 games. The Knicks were obviously better than an 8-seed.

[Sean Cagney]

I don't see 14&15 being very deserving of a top 20 mention.

Come on man, just because it's the Spurs. Largest margin of victory in Finals history and most 15+ point margin in the playoffs, you must be out of your fucking mind to say they don't belong on the list or just hating. :rolleyes
The '99 Spurs started off 6-8 and ended up finishing the regular season 31-5. Then went 15-2 in the playoffs.

I've always thought they're criminally underrated tbh.
I agree with you 100% there, very underrated team.

[Killakobe81]

The '99 Spurs started off 6-8 and ended up finishing the regular season 31-5. Then went 15-2 in the playoffs.

I've always thought they're criminally underrated tbh.

The backcourt was mediocre but combining a still effective David with what we know now as the best all around big since Kareem ... was almost unfair. Definitely one of the best defensive teams i have ever seen especially at rim protection....if that team had Bowen ...

[ambchang]

The backcourt was mediocre but combining a still effective David with what we know now as the best all around big since Kareem ... was almost unfair. Definitely one of the best defensive teams i have ever seen especially at rim protection....if that team had Bowen ...

Robinson wasn't just "still effective", he anchored the defense, and was a huge part of the offense.

[Killakobe81]

Robinson wasn't just "still effective", he anchored the defense, and was a huge part of the offense.

Are you serious? You quibbling over word choice? When I say still effective I did not mean it it as a slight you did see I said it was one of the best frontlines ever at rim protection? That was largely due to David who took on Shaq or any of the best bigs on teh opposing team ... jeez.

[ambchang]

Are you serious? You quibbling over word choice? When I say still effective I did not mean it it as a slight you did see I said it was one of the best frontlines ever at rim protection? That was largely due to David who took on Shaq or any of the best bigs on teh opposing team ... jeez.

Still effective speaks to being average.

[Killakobe81]

Still effective speaks to being average.

He did anchor the paint but effective was meant to to say he was not as good as he was in his prime. Robinson defenders point out how key he was to the 1999 squad. Duncan homers act as though Timmy carried Del negro and Avery by himself to a title. That is why I said he was still effective tbh it was meant as a compliment not to say he was average.

[ambchang]

He did anchor the paint but effective was meant to to say he was not as good as he was in his prime. Robinson defenders point out how key he was to the 1999 squad. Duncan homers act as though Timmy carried Del negro and Avery by himself to a title. That is why I said he was still effective tbh it was meant as a compliment not to say he was average.

Robinson was key. He anchored the defense, and shared a bit of the offense (Duncan clearly had the bigger share though).

03 though, Duncan carried that team to a title. The team was mediocre on paper, but Duncan went 01 Shaq the entire season and carried them to a title.

[Thread]

Robinson was key. He anchored the defense

Yep, he was no longer The Little Mermaid or Chicken of the Sea, eh, Amb?

[TDMVPDPOY]

He did anchor the paint but effective was meant to to say he was not as good as he was in his prime. Robinson defenders point out how key he was to the 1999 squad. Duncan homers act as though Timmy carried Del negro and Avery by himself to a title. That is why I said he was still effective tbh it was meant as a compliment not to say he was average.

wtf

[djohn2oo8]

:lol Yeah, his "legendary" first round of the playoffs shot. How'd he do in the second round again? Oh, that's right, he blew a 3-1 lead and a 19-point lead at home and was petrified to shoot the ball from the 4th quarter for Game 6 until garbage time of Game 7. Might I add that he got punked by ancient fossils like Jason Terry and Pablo Prigioni. He's still never been past the second round of the playoffs.

Leave it to a Suns fan to idolize a loser, though. If Choke Paul had hit that same first-round shot against the Spurs in a Suns uniform, they literally would have thrown a parade downtown :lmao
Blake pussed out too.