• Announcements

    • Patrick Bateman

      Check out the new Rotoworld Beta Site!   11/14/2018

      Rotoworld has been the industry leader in fantasy news and analysis for years, but it was time for a much-needed facelift!  While our around-the-clock, comprehensive coverage will remain the same, the new Rotoworld design will be sleeker, easier to navigate, more video-friendly and will finally be mobile-optimized.    That’s right, you can finally stop pinching the screens on your phones to read our content!  Right now we’re in the beta phase of our launch, and it’s still a work-in-progress, but we’d love for you to check out our soon-to-be new digs, and let us know what you think: https://beta.rotoworld.com.    And then please use the Contact Us button to give us feedback!  

Recommended Posts

Curious what fans think regarding warriors legacy. Even if they win the chip this year, have these playoffs changed your opion on how you view them or do they just have to win the chip regardless of how they accomplish it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on the playoffs.

 

If they lose to the Rockets I’ll view them as the most disappointing team I’ve seen. How you can be so stacked and not win and also just a few years ago removed from losing after going 73-9.

 

If they win this year my view will remain as one of the best teams ever. If they win next year I believe they’re a legitimate dynasty. 

 

They don’t have to blow out the Rockets. Rockets have the MVP and another superstar along with very good depth. I still believe Warriors in 6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the greatest whining teams ever. With the start  power they have, they should be finishing every playoff round in maximum 5 games.   In no particular order Jordan's Bulls, Showtime Lakers, Bird's Celtics are the teams with best legacy.  Once Pop retires you can add Pop's Spurs to the list.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they win this year they are a legit dynasty in the making. They would sit at the 5th spot on Top 5 dynasties. That 73-9 record to get to the finals and lose a 3-1 lead to Lebron is a legendary loss to me.

 

If anybody is wondering who my Top 5 dynasties are:

 

1. Lakers (Magic)

2. Bulls ( Jordan)

3. Lakers (Kobe)

4. Spurs (Duncan)

5. Celtics (Bird)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RedDogNamedClippers said:

If they win this year they are a legit dynasty in the making. They would sit at the 5th spot on Top 5 dynasties. That 73-9 record to get to the finals and lose a 3-1 lead to Lebron is a legendary loss to me.

 

If anybody is wondering who my Top 5 dynasties are:

 

1. Lakers (Magic)

2. Bulls ( Jordan)

3. Lakers (Kobe)

4. Spurs (Duncan)

5. Celtics (Bird)

If Kobe and Shaq didn’t start to beef Lakers from 99-2010 could have been #1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gile Pile said:

One of the greatest whining teams ever. With the start  power they have, they should be finishing every playoff round in maximum 5 games.   In no particular order Jordan's Bulls, Showtime Lakers, Bird's Celtics are the teams with best legacy.  Once Pop retires you can add Pop's Spurs to the list.  

 

If they win the title, no one cares how many games it took to get there. Just like no one cares, or remembers, what the Bulls and Lakers faced in their respective conferences on there way to titles.

 

1 hour ago, Gohawks said:

If Kobe and Shaq didn’t start to beef Lakers from 99-2010 could have been #1.

 

How? Part of the struggle with dynasties, is the toll it takes on players, both mentally and physically. Lakers were already beefing en route to their 2nd and 3rd titles. They were just mentally done after their 3rd title. Plus there is the fact Shaq was already on his way into a precipitous decline in regards. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Their legacy to me so far is as one of the best teams (IMO the best team) ever assembled in league history. No team can ever match the Celtics in the 50s in terms of championship dominance, but all things considered, relative to their era this is the best team ever. And it's on pace to be the most impressive run ever.

 

The think that muddies the waters is Durant's move to me, because it was SO atypically cowardly. No matter what anyone says, NOTHING had ever set a precedent for that kind of parity-crippling move in all of sports. He's free to make any decision he's comfortable with as it's his life, just as I'm free to say that it was mind-numbingly pathetic. They were already on pace to be on that all-time GOAT level, even before he jumped on their coattails. Curry became one of the the greatest players ever by 2015-2016, yet his supporting cast was winning 2nd round playoff series easily without him. In the tougher conference. It was one of the greatest and most well-built teams in HISTORY even pre-KD. 73 wins, 1 ring, and another near ring in the first two Kerr years. 

 

I don't want to over-hate on Durant as he seems like a nice guy for the most part, but I can't help feeling like his choice made it more difficult to judge this Warriors run. Prior to him it was so refreshingly old-school, the way they'd built the team. I get it from the Warriors' perspective, since to that point they'd assembled their core entirely through the draft. I don't know. But credit to them for creating a culture so desirable that he was willing to overlook how weak it was to come running there. You wouldn't see that happen on many teams throughout history, since one of the reasons he cited was he wanted to enjoy playing the game more. Their elite pace-and-space system is tailor-made for that.

 

I expect them to ROLL to the next few championships if healthy. That said... I agree with Gohawks. If they lose this series, or ANY playoff series with the weapons they have, that will be absolutely enormous. This is not the kind of team that can get away with being less than an historic dynasty without taking a massive legacy blow. They carry themselves (rightfully so) as if they're so much better than everyone else and above it all. They BETTER back it up. :)

Edited by ComericanPie
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gile Pile said:

One of the greatest whining teams ever. With the start  power they have, they should be finishing every playoff round in maximum 5 games.   In no particular order Jordan's Bulls, Showtime Lakers, Bird's Celtics are the teams with best legacy.  Once Pop retires you can add Pop's Spurs to the list.  

This is the first time with Durant they won’t win in 5 games or less. You’re clearly salty though so I’m sure that’s irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, ComericanPie said:

Their legacy to me so far is as one of the best teams (IMO the best team) ever assembled in league history. No team can ever match the Celtics in the 50s in terms of championship dominance, but all things considered, relative to their era this is the best team ever. And it's on pace to be the most impressive run ever.

 

The think that muddies the waters is Durant's move to me, because it was SO atypically cowardly. No matter what anyone says, NOTHING had ever set a precedent for that kind of parity-crippling move in all of sports. He's free to make any decision he's comfortable with as it's his life, just as I'm free to say that it was mind-numbingly pathetic. They were already on pace to be on that all-time GOAT level, even before he jumped on their coattails. Curry became one of the the greatest players ever by 2015-2016, yet his supporting cast was winning 2nd round playoff series easily without him. In the tougher conference. It was one of the greatest and most well-built teams in HISTORY even pre-KD. 73 wins, 1 ring, and another near ring in the first two Kerr years. 

 

I don't want to over-hate on Durant as he seems like a nice guy for the most part, but I can't help feeling like his choice made it more difficult to judge this Warriors run. Prior to him it was so refreshingly old-school, the way they'd built the team. I get it from the Warriors' perspective, since to that point they'd assembled their core entirely through the draft. I don't know. But credit to them for creating a culture so desirable that he was willing to overlook how weak it was to come running there. You wouldn't see that happen on many teams throughout history, since one of the reasons he cited was he wanted to enjoy playing the game more. Their elite pace-and-space system is tailor-made for that.

 

I expect them to ROLL to the next few championships if healthy. That said... I agree with Gohawks. If they lose this series, or ANY playoff series with the weapons they have, that will be absolutely enormous. This is not the kind of team that can get away with being less than an historic dynasty without taking a massive legacy blow. They carry themselves (rightfully so) as if they're so much better than everyone else and above it all. They BETTER back it up. :)

I understand blaming Durant but it’s hard to blame the Warriors. Their goal is to get better and better. It would be a ridiculous claim to say they shouldn’t get Durant because it puts them so far ahead. They build incredibly through the draft which allowed them to get him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

I understand blaming Durant but it’s hard to blame the Warriors. Their goal is to get better and better. It would be a ridiculous claim to say they shouldn’t get Durant because it puts them so far ahead. They build incredibly through the draft which allowed them to get him. 

I agree with this... front-office wise I'd have done the same. I'm not sure how guys like Steph feel about it deep down since his reputation seems to have taken somewhat of a hit (IMO unfairly) as a result. You're totally right though. I just think the acquisition of Durant is the reason why I'm so convinced they'll roll off 3-4 more titles. Without it, they had a chance but it would seem much less a lock and they'd have a few teams battling with them.

 

Still, the team's run itself shouldn't be dinged because of what KD did.

Edited by ComericanPie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

I understand blaming Durant but it’s hard to blame the Warriors. Their goal is to get better and better. It would be a ridiculous claim to say they shouldn’t get Durant because it puts them so far ahead. They build incredibly through the draft which allowed them to get him. 

Nowhere did he blame the Warriors. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, miasma16 said:

Nowhere did he blame the Warriors. 

Never stated he did. In fact, it was quite obvious he didn’t. I was just making a general point. However, since your job is clearly to play devils advocate every chance you get I understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ComericanPie said:

I agree with this... front-office wise I'd have done the same. I'm not sure how guys like Steph feel about it deep down since his reputation seems to have taken somewhat of a hit (IMO unfairly) as a result. You're totally right though. I just think the acquisition of Durant is the reason why I'm so convinced they'll roll off 3-4 more titles. Without it, they had a chance but it would seem much less a lock and they'd have a few teams battling with them.

 

Still, the team's run itself shouldn't be dinged because of what KD did.

I hated the move the most because of Steph. He was so damn fun to watch but now he plays a lot more conservative. Shame. The chucks from 27+ feet were like watching a poster every game.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, RedDogNamedClippers said:

If they win this year they are a legit dynasty in the making. They would sit at the 5th spot on Top 5 dynasties. That 73-9 record to get to the finals and lose a 3-1 lead to Lebron is a legendary loss to me.

 

If anybody is wondering who my Top 5 dynasties are:

 

1. Lakers (Magic)

2. Bulls ( Jordan)

3. Lakers (Kobe)

4. Spurs (Duncan)

5. Celtics (Bird)

How in the world are Russell's Celticcs not only not here, but not #1?

 

1. 60's Celtics

2. 90s Bulls

3/4 80s Lakers and Celtics

 

5. Popovich Spurs (so different, hard to compare)

15 hours ago, RealityBasketball said:

Don't most people already feel they are a dynasty now?

I dunno.  If they make it to 4 straight finals and get 3 rings, sure.  If they make it to the Finals but lose, maybe.  If the Rockets manage to win this series, I don't think so.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Pyschout said:

How in the world are Russell's Celticcs not only not here, but not #1?

 

1. 60's Celtics

2. 90s Bulls

3/4 80s Lakers and Celtics

 

5. Popovich Spurs (so different, hard to compare)

I dunno.  If they make it to 4 straight finals and get 3 rings, sure.  If they make it to the Finals but lose, maybe.  If the Rockets manage to win this series, I don't think so.

 

Maybe because I wasn’t alive during the 60’s Celtics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, RedDogNamedClippers said:

 

Maybe because I wasn’t alive during the 60’s Celtics?

 How old were you won Magic won his first title?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Pyschout said:

 How old were you won Magic won his first title?

 

0

 

But I was alive when he won his 85 and 87/88 title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure you can see my confusion as you'd decide to "count" dynasties that last won a title when you were 8 but not count ones before you were born.  It's not like a little kid's understanding is much better than no understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RedDogNamedClippers said:

 

Maybe because I wasn’t alive during the 60’s Celtics?

That explains why you forgot to mention that other dynasty that played when the league had 8 teams, players shot underhanded, and everything was in black and white: the 1949-54 Lakers. That squad won 5 out of 6 titles.

 

George Mikan was a fantasy beast for that 48-49 team: 28.3 PTS with 3.6 AST on 42% FG's and 77% FT's (4-cat).

 

Step it up, RDNC.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kaboom said:

That explains why you forgot to mention that other dynasty that played when the league had 8 teams, players shot underhanded, and everything was in black and white: the 1949-54 Lakers. That squad won 5 out of 6 titles.

 

George Mikan was a fantasy beast for that 48-49 team: 28.3 PTS with 3.6 AST on 42% FG's and 77% FT's (4-cat).

 

Step it up, RDNC.

 

Dang, let me time travel real quick. If only I was born 30 years earlier.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kaboom said:

That explains why you forgot to mention that other dynasty that played when the league had 8 teams, players shot underhanded, and everything was in black and white: the 1949-54 Lakers. That squad won 5 out of 6 titles.

 

George Mikan was a fantasy beast for that 48-49 team: 28.3 PTS with 3.6 AST on 42% FG's and 77% FT's (4-cat).

 

Step it up, RDNC.

This creates an interesting debate for sure.

 

I have no doubt that very few players from the 60s would do well today. Some of the big men would be excellent but most guards wouldn't even be able to make a college roster. However, that doesn't change that they were dominant based on what was available at the time and it doesn't change that they helped for mthe game today.

 

Also, it's hard to judge the Celtics dynasty compared to others. The season basically started equivalent to the second round of the playoffs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2018 at 1:37 PM, Gohawks said:

If Kobe and Shaq didn’t start to beef Lakers from 99-2010 could have been #1.

 

Dumb argument. Would where Jordan's Bulls rank if he hadn't retired for 1.5 seasons? 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, jstep13 said:

 

Dumb argument. Would where Jordan's Bulls rank if he hadn't retired for 1.5 seasons? 

Dumb argument, without Rodman they were eliminated in the 1995 eastern conference finals by Shaq & Penny. Without Rodman Hakeem would of eaten them alive.

Edited by Auction>Snake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Auction>Snake said:

Dumb argument, without Rodman they were eliminated in the 1995 eastern conference finals by Shaq & Penny. Without Rodman Hakeem would of eaten them alive.

 

 

You mean eliminated GOAT who had just come back from retirement having played 2 months after being off 1.5 years? derp.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.