How many Regular Season wins will the GS Warriors end up with?

[Marchesk]

repeat rings/ 24-0 start/ 73+ wins is getting too damn greedy.

It is greedy, but do you think they don't care about being considered the best team of all time? They certainly cared about breaking that 33 game win streak.

[1987_Lakers]

Yeah of course repeating is number one priority. So if Curry, Dray and Klay are showing wear and tear near the end of the season, you give them rest. But if they're not, then why not go for it? They're not averaging a ton of minutes as it is. The best starting players used to average 40+ mintues once upon a time. What are the Warrior averages, 32-34 minutes? That's like 15 less games over an entire season.

That's another positive for Golden State, because they don't play alot of minutes there is a good chance they will be just fine when the season is coming to an end.

For what it's worth.

Warriors this season...
Curry: 34 MPG
Green: 34 MPG
Klay: 33 MPG

'96 Bulls...
Jordan: 38 MPG
Pippen: 37 MPG
Rodman: 33 MPG

The Warriors' trio (mid 20's) is also younger than Chicago's trio (early-mid 30's), so I don't think running out of gas will be an issue for Golden State.

[Marchesk]

That's another positive for Golden State, because they don't play alot of minutes there is a good chance they will be just fine when the season is coming to an end.

For what it's worth.

Warriors this season...
Curry: 34 MPG
Green: 34 MPG
Klay: 33 MPG

'96 Bulls...
Jordan: 38 MPG
Pippen: 37 MPG
Rodman: 33 MPG

Not as big a difference as I thought, but 3-4 minutes for a season is still like 7 games difference (doing math in my head so roughly speaking).

[Marchesk]

Now of course some people do bring up the 2007 Patriots as a cautionary tale for any championship contender who chooses not to rest in pursuit of some record.

But it's speculation that the reason they lost to the Giants in the SB was because of lack of rest. They did have a bye week to rest, and teams have won the SB from the wild card spot, where they needed to play the entire season to make it.

[DMV2]

Yeah of course repeating is number one priority. So if Curry, Dray and Klay are showing wear and tear near the end of the season, you give them rest. But if they're not, then why not go for it? They're not averaging a ton of minutes as it is. The best starting players used to average 40+ mintues once upon a time. What are the Warrior averages, 32-34 minutes? That's like 16 less games over an entire season. Even if it's just five minutes less than average, you're still talking about 400 total minutes or about 12 games.

It is greedy, but do you think they don't care about being considered the best team of all time? They certainly cared about breaking that 33 game win streak.

they should play to win every single game obviously, while still balance a bit of rest for their stars.

i think they were on a mission to prove all their critics wrong about their playoff run. people were saying they got lucky because of key injuries. i dont know if they planned on going 24-0 to start the season, it did feel organic. it became a thing after winning so many games, just like any streak.

if you go out to break records, run up the scoreboard, etc...you might end up like the patriots and fall flat on your face. idk...i kinda like watching records broken organically, by chance...much better surprise.

[72-10]

Did they rest before or after getting to 70 wins?

They rested once they reached 70, yes. I think they rested the last four games of the season and the team went 1-3 in those games.

The Bulls would have had home court locked up before then, right?

Yes, they did.

[jongib369]

69-73

They'll probably get close, and REALLY push to beat the bulls near the end...Whether they beat the bulls or not idk...But if they are close, and make that push, they'll likely lose the first game in the playoffs and everyone will be like "EMAHGERD THUR OUT OF GAS" which they very well might be...But after that they'll likely win the next 4...Spurs if they face them will push them to 5 or 6...Oklahoma, if they face them, might push them to 6 or 7. But, nevertheless chances are pretty high they'll win again this season. Next season though, considering the dominance of that team...I expect a big name free agent to join a well established team taking a huge cut oit of frustration. Durant if he leaves doesn't seem like the guy that would be like "If you can't beat them, join them" ..But rather join a team that's got the pieces to beat the Warriors. I'd prefer he stay on the Thunder, and pull one of the other 'big free agents if they're in potion to do so

Anyone know what teams could realistically pickup Durant, or Howard?

I'd really like to see Curry be humbled so to speak and lose, not three peating. Not because I don't like him, but to place him in that position that made him push himself so hard to get where he's at once again. I want to see him hit the weight room even more like a madman, and demand to play more minutes from Kerr(Not too much more)..Rip the league a new asshole more so than he's doing this season, winning a chip averaging close to 40...Regular season, and playoffs. Or jist a lot more assists ontop of a bit more scoring to have a rediculous PRF. I want to see him 3 peat then.....And then whether or not he pulls a backseat and falls into a Duncan like role with age, continue to play and get more rings than Jordan.

[1987_Lakers]

if you go out to break records, run up the scoreboard, etc...you might end up like the patriots and fall flat on your face.

I'm not saying the Warriors are a lock to win the championship, but the NFL is a very different sport. Because of the one and done in the NFL playoffs you see the better team lose once in a while.

Out of the 3 major sports in America, the NBA is by far the most predictable in which the team that is expected to win usually wins. Think about it, when was the last time you saw a #4 or #5 seed win an NBA championship? It never happens.

In the MLB you see wildcard teams win championships all the time, same with the NFL once in a while.

[Marchesk]

if you go out to break records, run up the scoreboard, etc...you might end up like the patriots and fall flat on your face.

But is that what happened to the Patriots, or was it that the Giants were the perfect matchup to thwart the Patriots, and they went on a tear that playoffs (winning in GB & Dallas)?

[72-10]

Their point differential right now is about the same as those Bulls teams. No shocker there.

[DMV2]

Now of course some people do bring up the 2007 Patriots as a cautionary tale for any championship contender who chooses not to rest in pursuit of some record.

But it's speculation that the reason they lost to the Giants in the SB was because of lack of rest. They did have a bye week to rest, and teams have won the SB from the wild card spot, where they needed to play the entire season to make it.

patriots o-line got exposed, smacked around for 60 minutes. brady couldn't do shit. kinda remarkable brady was able throw a game leading touchdown late in the 4th. unfortunately, eli and new york still had enough time.

i dont know if resting/not resting was a factor. but the patriots deserved to be humiliated on the biggest stage though that season. spygate and running up the score.

[72-10]

btw it may not be the point of the thread, but those Bulls teams were better on defense

[Marchesk]

dont know if resting/not resting was a factor. but the patriots deserved to be humiliated on the biggest stage though that season. spygate and running up the score.

Oh believe me, that ranked up there with the Pistons beating the Lakers in the 2004 finals, and the Spurs wiping the floor with the Heat in 2014.

But I was glad to see the Patriots go for that perfect season. And they did it playing the Giants in game 16, which went to overtime. Actually, neither team needed to play starters as both already had their playoff positions set. But the Giants players wanted to prevent the perfect season as much as the Patriots wanted it. If I recall correctly, the coach (Coughlin) let the starters vote and they voted to play.

And that's one thing that never gets mentioned. The Giants played their starters that game, lost, then played in the wild card the next week. The lack of rest didn't hurt them. They went on the road three straight games. I believe they credited losing to the Patriots in OT that last regular season game as what gave them confidence to win the SB.

[DMV2]

I'm not saying the Warriors are a lock to win the championship, but the NFL is a very different sport. Because of the one and done in the NFL playoffs you see the better team lose once in a while.

Out of the 3 major sports in America, the NBA is by far the most predictable in which the team that is expected to win usually wins. Think about it, when was the last time you saw a #4 or #5 seed win an NBA championship? It never happens.

In the MLB you see wildcard teams win championships all the time, same with the NFL once in a while.

fair point. 1995 6th seed rockets might be the only non-hca team to win a title.

[Marchesk]

btw it may not be the point of the thread, but those Bulls teams were better on defense

If only someone would invent a time machine.