has there ever been a more stacked team

[bdreason]

These were more stacked teams than the current Warriors? really? The 01' Lakers were more stacked? You actually believe that?

Two top 10 GOAT's + Glen Rice, Robert Horry, A.C. Green, Derrick Fisher, Rick Fox, Ron Harper, Brian Shaw. 67 Regular season wins. NBA Title.

[NBAGOAT]

The heat were more stacked relevant to their conference.

really? the Celtics were still there for a couple of years. Ik the narrative is Rose didn't have much help but Noah, Deng, Boozer is good. If you're talking about 13 and 14, I could see it but nr for 11 or 12.

[AngelEyes]

Yeah, I really don't think that 00-02 Laker team that 3 peated was that stacked in talent. They had Shaq and Kobe of course, but outside of that, it wasn't especially talented. The 01' team went into a zone in the postseason, but those teams rosters weren't that great top to bottom. It says a lot about the Shaqobe duo that they won 3 in a row.

It's not like the 83' Sixers, for instance, with reigning MVP Moses Malone, all-time great Erving, excellent players like Cheeks and Toney, Bobby Jones.....or the Lakers and Celtics in the 80s.

What made the early 00's Lakers so great outside of the obvious (Shaq, Kobe, Phil) was that they put perfect role players on those teams like Horry, Fox, Fisher, etc. Those teams were never about being stacked. It was just two superstars, a great coach and a bunch of good role players.

[AngelEyes]

Two top 10 GOAT's + Glen Rice, Robert Horry, A.C. Green, Derrick Fisher, Rick Fox, Ron Harper, Brian Shaw. 67 Regular season wins. NBA Title.

Two super stars and role players. Rice wasn't even on the 01' team. He was on the 2000 team but by that time he clearly was just a role player, a very good role player but still a role player. All those other guys are clearly just role players as well. No one would ever use those players as an example of the Lakers being stacked. . . because they weren't.

[Stringer Bell]

And I love the Bulls and I always will but the 96' Bulls weren't even the best Bulls team from that era, the 92' team will always be superior considering Jordan was at his zenith in 1992. And no way in hell was the 1996 Chicago Bulls more stacked than this Warriors team.

Interesting, I like to read old SI articles just for fun and to see what viewpoints were at certain times, and some people felt the same way.

http://www.si.com/vault/1996/01/29/2...record-70-wins

It seemed like the 1992 Bulls did get sort of complacent during the postseason, or were just inconsistent, but I definitely agree that 1992 Jordan was better than 1996 Jordan.

[SouBeachTalents]

Which Kareem? The 40-41 year old 4th option who was sharing minutes with Mychal Thompson in 87/88?


Or still early 80's end of Prime Kareem before the emergence of Scott & Worthy?


The OP means these players are at their absolute peaks with 28 year old Curry being the oldest of the 4.




Nothing like 41 year old limited minutes Kareem

Well even the early '80's Lakers still had Cooper playing at a DPOY caliber level to go along with 20 ppg scorers in Wilkes/Nixon

[AngelEyes]

Two top 10 GOAT's + Glen Rice, Robert Horry, A.C. Green, Derrick Fisher, Rick Fox, Ron Harper, Brian Shaw. 67 Regular season wins. NBA Title.

Just because you win a ton of games doesn't mean you're stacked. It just means you have a good winning formula and that team clearly did. Two great players, a an excellent coach and a bunch of guys who knew their roles.

[GrapeApe]

The heat were more stacked relevant to their conference.

How? The Heat had to face two championship contenders in eastern playoffs. The Bulls were the top seed and the Celtics were the defending conference champions. The only threat to the Warriors are the Spurs.

[tpols]

really? the Celtics were still there for a couple of years. Ik the narrative is Rose didn't have much help but Noah, Deng, Boozer is good. If you're talking about 13 and 14, I could see it but nr for 11 or 12.

The C's big three all out of prime, and Bulls led by D-Rose werent contenders to me, but regular season champs who won a lot with their bench (where starters and 8 man rotations become more important in the playoffs). Miami won both those series in 5 games so it's not even like they put up some crazy fight either .. and I know the bulls series came down to closer margins but part of what made miami so good was their ability to defend.. and Chicago was seriously lacking offensive firepower to begin with.


Overall, I feel more confident that teams like the spurs or clippers if they could get their sh!t together are more dangerous to the warriors.. I mean would you take chicago or boston over san antonio? I sure wouldn't.


And I think most people on here would agree that peak Lebron and peak Wade are more potent playoff weapons than anybody on the warriors. If the two teams met, The Heat would have the two best players in the series. Is that enough to make up the disparity in the rest of their line ups? I dont believe so.. but when you factor competition into it I think it's a legit argument to say miami is greater than or equal to.

[red1]

Agreed everyone. Team just went 73-9 and just won without him. Most stacked team of all-time.

Period.

[SouBeachTalents]

The C's big three all out of prime, and Bulls led by D-Rose werent contenders to me. Miami won both those series in 5 games so it's not even like they put up some crazy fight either .. and I know the bulls series came down to closer margins but part of what made miami so good was their ability to defend.. and Chicago was seriously lacking offensive firepower to begin with.


Overall, I feel more confident that teams like the spurs or clippers if they could get their sh!t together are more dangerous to the warriors.. I mean would you take chicago or boston over san antonio? I sure wouldn't.


And I think most people on here would agree that peak Lebron and peak Wade are more potent playoff weapons than anybody on the warriors. If the two teams met, The Heat would have the two best players in the series. Is that enough to make up the disparity in the rest of their line ups? I dont believe so.. but when you factor competition into it I think it's a legit argument to say miami is greater than or equal to.

Ok, but LeBron had peak Wade for 1 season, and he only declined every year they played together. And even just comparing 2011, LeBron/Wade & Curry/Durant is certainly comparable, the rest of the rosters are not. Not even close. Klay/Green/Iggy > Bosh & scrubs

[FireDavidKahn]

Nope.

4 ALL NBA PLAYERS FROM THE SAME TEAM COLLUDED TO MAKE IT HAPPEN

[tpols]

Ok, but LeBron had peak Wade for 1 season, and he only declined every year they played together. And even just comparing 2011, LeBron/Wade & Curry/Durant is certainly comparable, the rest of the rosters are not. Not even close. Klay/Green/Iggy > Bosh & scrubs

but we didnt know that until things actually started to happen. Thats why this overeaction is dumb. Curry could get knocked out the playoffs again.. or we could see some decline or injury to other guys like what we saw w/ the Heat.. we dont know.

Again.. the Heat were self proclaiming 6 titles or so when they first joined up.. then reality hit, and you realize talent's nice but you still gotta do the job. And there's a ton of sh!t that will pop up to change things as time moves along.

[NBAGOAT]

The C's big three all out of prime, and Bulls led by D-Rose werent contenders to me, but regular season champs who won a lot with their bench (where starters and 8 man rotations become more important in the playoffs). Miami won both those series in 5 games so it's not even like they put up some crazy fight either .. and I know the bulls series came down to closer margins but part of what made miami so good was their ability to defend.. and Chicago was seriously lacking offensive firepower to begin with.


Overall, I feel more confident that teams like the spurs or clippers if they could get their sh!t together are more dangerous to the warriors.. I mean would you take chicago or boston over san antonio? I sure wouldn't.


And I think most people on here would agree that peak Lebron and peak Wade are more potent playoff weapons than anybody on the warriors. If the two teams met, The Heat would have the two best players in the series. Is that enough to make up the disparity in the rest of their line ups? I dont believe so.. but when you factor competition into it I think it's a legit argument to say miami is greater than or equal to.

well, the celtics did take the heat to 7 in 2012 too(bosh was injured however). I mean you could be right, it all depends on how this season plays out. The Spurs and Clippers could definitely play like 60 win teams this year and give the Warriors tough series. They could also get swept however. Spurs are going be pretty reliant on just kawhi/lma and now gasol since their old big 3 is really declining. Clips still have a bad bench and cp3 could decline.

[tpols]

well, the celtics did take the heat to 7 in 2012 too(bosh was injured however). I mean you could be right, it all depends on how this season plays out. The Spurs and Clippers could definitely play like 60 win teams this year and give the Warriors tough series. They could also get swept however. Spurs are going be pretty reliant on just kawhi/lma and now gasol since their old big 3 is really declining. Clips still have a bad bench and cp3 could decline.

i'm curious to see how pau and aldridge do against a small frontcourt.. even tim duncan if he comes back. was reading the other day that tony parker thinks he has 4 or so years left lol.. we'll see. There's going to be a ton of pressure on the warriors to steamroll and I dont think it's gonna come that easy.