Is last year's Spurs better than this Warriors team?

[Timmy D for MVP]

They dominated the Finals, but they got taken to 7 games in the first round and they were 2-2 against OKC with Ibaka in the lineup. Spurs didn't really dominate on their way to the Finals, lets see how Golden State does.

Well they did dominate past the first round. But it flourished in the Finals.

But to compare point differential and record in the playoff and the like is misleading because there was better competition for the Spurs last year. No one's fault, just how it is.

So we kind of have to just hypothetical it out. And I personally think the Spurs will would win head to head, and that they were to better team based on what I saw from them and what I see from this Warriors team.

I'm actually pretty bummed there has been no real challenge to this GSW team based on how the playoffs have unfolded. I think it's contributed to their occasional lack of sharpness.

[bdreason]

H2H Series could go either way. I would lean towards the Spurs. If Warriors had HCA it's a toss up.

As far as who was the better team, I think it's close. I like the balance and experience of the Spurs, but I think the Warriors are more talented. Again, if we're talking about a playoff series, I'm going with experience.

If we're talking about who had the better season, I think it's the Warriors (so far). More regular season wins and statistical dominance over the league. More convincing in the first 3 rounds of the playoffs as well.

[houston]

no they were not

[SCdac]

Last years Spurs needed seven games to beat the Mavs in the FIRST ROUND. Let's not act like they had such an easy time of it getting through the west. They were practically almost eliminated in the first round. Get off their nuts, ish.

The Spurs demolished the Mavs in Game 7, it wasn't even close. and one of the Mavs wins came off an incredible game winning shot by Vince Carter, not a resounding win I'd say. "Practically eliminated" isn't accurate at all, Mavs sputtered out in the first round while awaking a sleeping giant.

[Cleverness]

Not to mention they beat an injured OKC team without Ibaka the first 2 games. OKC actually did quite well vs the Spurs once Ibaka came back and he wasn't even 100%. It's funny how people down talked the Warriors for playing injured teams when San Antonio went up against an injured team in the WCF.

I think it's better to make this thread once the season is over, Golden State hasn't won a title yet so there are still non believers out there, if they win the title in dominant fashion I bet you many posters will pick Golden State. I made a thread a couple of months back comparing the '02 Kings to Golden State, almost EVERYONE picked the '02 Kings. If I make that thread right now you will see many people picking Golden State.

People are always negative towards a team when they haven't won anything yet if you are comparing them to a past championship team, that's just how it is. Lets just wait and see how the Warriors do against the Cavs then we will talk.

I'll just say this, being 67-15 and having pretty much the #1 offense & #1 defense also winning a title means you are an all-time great team.

This.

[Genaro]

Let's see what happens in the Finals. Warriors could very well lose it and this comparative would seem idiotic.
What I can tell is that so far (regular season + first 3 rounds) the Warriors did better. The fact that the Spurs took a giant dump on the Heat in the finals got people impressed but their 3 first rounds weren't dominant like that. To be honest at the time there were a lot of people picking the Heat to win, myself included.