Sigh. Damn, without the Bosh injury, it's all unraveled. Of course there's more athletic talent and money and people attempting to play than ever. All those forces would point toward best ever players, absolutely, and especially on average. They can jump higher, run faster, and shoot better than ever, and that's worth a lot. I'm not sure it automatically means best ever teams, though it should certainly help; in fact if all else has remained equal, it would be the absolute determining factor. To my eyes, all else has not remained equal. (e.g. player avg. dwell time with a team; avg. dwell time of coach with a team or player; practice time for teams; avg. power of head coaches to enact much of anything; a multitude of other rules). Actually, I'm pretty fired up now. I can't wait to go find the scientific communities thriving today that should put Germany 1895-1926 to shame... Einstein, Heisenberg and those old poorly trained, low-population schmucks who came up with so many (I mean, for their limited era), so-called great ideas. Since the population is so much larger, science funding so much greater, and our education more rich than ever, it should not be hard for me to find many examples. They've just been relatively quiet for whatever reason.
The Raptors have 56 wins this year. That's how you know the league is watered down compared to the past.
It doesn't mean nothing, but it certainly means your not the goat. Ain't nobody calling those players the goat.... Cuz if they didn't win, and if they had won, they would've been better players. 6 bulls titles vs 1 Warriors title. Ain't no goat dude
Blah you are smarter than those b****es. You have an iPhone and you know what a Higgs Boson is. Own it - u bad bro.
there really wasn't all that much outside of the lakers and celtics. the west was basically a dumpster fire for most of the decade, although not at 2000's eastern conference levels. while it took some upsets, the lakers literally once beat 3 teams with a combined 118-128 record to make the finals. the east had the sixers and bucks for the first half of the decade and then the pistons for the 2nd half. other than that, no teams that would really be called great other than some one-offs here and there that had mid-50's win totals. but outside of the bulls, usually one star teams. or the sonics with no stars and a team that traditionally underperformed in the playoffs. or the jazz with 2 stars who traditionally underperformed in the playoffs. i don't see much difference from this era in terms of contenders. and don't forget, the bulls 72-10 team did it in en expansion season which diluted the league's talent. even with the clippers injuries giving them a skatewalk to the conference finals, if golden state has to beat a historically great spurs team and a cavs team with lebron, that would be a fairly challenging championship run.
why is absolutely athletic performance being talked about? elo would appear to be a relative ranking. the '85-'86 celtics would probably be overwhelmed by a decent number of teams from today just based on athletic differences and modern-day 3 point shooting skills, but that doesn't have anything to do with their elo rating.
LOL. Definitely a thread a little ahead of itself. Warriors got worse & worse as the playoffs wore on. Bench turned to mush, and the 3's quit falling. At this point, no longer in the GOAT conversation.
They are. Rockets beat that Cleveland team 8 out 10 times before they could beat Warriors in a 7 game series.
