No disrespect to the 09 team, but they shouldn't be that high. To rank a team that hasn't even won a championship yet over all the great teams of the 1980's, the three peat teams in the early 2000's, hell they shouldn't even be over the 2010 team. All of those teams had at least two Hall of Famers while the Warriors currently only have one. Just mind boggling this list is.
I can't help, but think guys like Magic, Kareem, Big Game James, Pat Riley, Kobe, Shaq, Phil Jackson, and the rest of them are laughing their asses off at such a list.
This is why just looking at stats is stupid. Each of the first 3 Lakers championship teams of the 2000s were exponentially better than the 2009 team. Kobe was better in 2001 and 2002 and we all know there is no comparison between Pau and Shaq. The 2000 Lakers team is arguably the deepest squad Kobe ever played with. I mean Rick Fox, Robert Horry, and Derek Fisher were all coming off the bench for goodness sake.
This years Warriors team would not have had a chance against last years Thunder or Spurs. They have largely benefitted from playing during a year where many of the top players around the league were getting injured as well as the stud rookies. The last couple of years have been a down era for the league in general.
This is why just looking at stats is stupid. Each of the first 3 Lakers championship teams of the 2000s were exponentially better than the 2009 team. Kobe was better in 2001 and 2002 and we all know there is no comparison between Pau and Shaq. The 2000 Lakers team is arguably the deepest squad Kobe ever played with. I mean Rick Fox, Robert Horry, and Derek Fisher were all coming off the bench for goodness sake.
This years Warriors team would not have had a chance against last years Thunder or Spurs. They have largely benefitted from playing during a year where many of the top players around the league were getting injured as well as the stud rookies. The last couple of years have been a down era for the league in general.
It would closer than you think this years Warriors if they win the title have an argument to be top 5 all time, their team stats say so
Just looking at the comments it sounds like some evil woman with some strange magic like Medusa put that together, I was afraid to click and turn to stone. We know what we saw, that team was much better than this GS team, don't let the article bring you down.
This is why just looking at stats is stupid. Each of the first 3 Lakers championship teams of the 2000s were exponentially better than the 2009 team. Kobe was better in 2001 and 2002 and we all know there is no comparison between Pau and Shaq. The 2000 Lakers team is arguably the deepest squad Kobe ever played with. I mean Rick Fox, Robert Horry, and Derek Fisher were all coming off the bench for goodness sake.
This years Warriors team would not have had a chance against last years Thunder or Spurs. They have largely benefitted from playing during a year where many of the top players around the league were getting injured as well as the stud rookies. The last couple of years have been a down era for the league in general.
It would closer than you think this years Warriors if they win the title have an argument to be top 5 all time, their team stats say so
I really hope this is sarcasm. Golden State isn't better any of our championship teams.
Just because your memories or eyes don't tell you the same thing as actual data, it doesn't make the data wrong. There is a reason we rely on actually recording events that happened--they don't lie, whereas our eyes and memories usually do.
Just because your memories or eyes don't tell you the same thing as actual data, it doesn't make the data wrong. There is a reason we rely on actually recording events that happened--they don't lie, whereas our eyes and memories usually do.
It's a Lakers forum so some of us can't get it out of our head how good those teams in the 2000's were, we should hold on tight to our dreams of those teams and not worry about some silly ELO stat.
This is why just looking at stats is stupid. Each of the first 3 Lakers championship teams of the 2000s were exponentially better than the 2009 team. Kobe was better in 2001 and 2002 and we all know there is no comparison between Pau and Shaq. The 2000 Lakers team is arguably the deepest squad Kobe ever played with. I mean Rick Fox, Robert Horry, and Derek Fisher were all coming off the bench for goodness sake.
This years Warriors team would not have had a chance against last years Thunder or Spurs. They have largely benefitted from playing during a year where many of the top players around the league were getting injured as well as the stud rookies. The last couple of years have been a down era for the league in general.
It would closer than you think this years Warriors if they win the title have an argument to be top 5 all time, their team stats say so
I don't care about the stats. This was a down year in the NBA. To be more specific, the NBA has been down for about 2 years now. Tons of injuries to star players. A couple of bad drafts resulting in not too many young stars. All the old time greats becoming a little over the hill. I've simply not been impressed by the quality of opposition they are presumably dominating.
The Celtics teams of 2008 and 2009 were amazing. The Heat teams of 2011-2013 were amazing. The Lakers of 2008-2010 were amazing. I would take all 3 of those teams to easily beat this years Warriors. EASILY. Hell I think Dwights 2009 Magic team would give em a run of their money.
The last 2 years have been pretty weak for the NBA IMO.
Just because your memories or eyes don't tell you the same thing as actual data, it doesn't make the data wrong. There is a reason we rely on actually recording events that happened--they don't lie, whereas our eyes and memories usually do.
all these team stats tell you is how good teams are vs. the opposition they against at that time. it doesn't tell you how good they are across the years. sure the warriors might be dominating their opposition more than the early 00s Lakers in the regular season, but that doesn't mean they were better. the Lakers could've been playing much tougher opponents.
Just because your memories or eyes don't tell you the same thing as actual data, it doesn't make the data wrong. There is a reason we rely on actually recording events that happened--they don't lie, whereas our eyes and memories usually do.
Data is no better or worse than the way it is being used. It is how data is grouped that makes it meaningful. When aggregating data, there is always a sniff test involved. If you cannot verify your findings based on observation, there needs to be a hell of a lot more scrutiny or you can end up in some pretty silly territory.
I haven't looked at the data, but it smells funny on the surface.
Joined: 24 Dec 2007 Posts: 35750 Location: Santa Clarita, CA (Hell) ->>>>>Ithaca, NY -≥≥≥≥≥Berkeley, CA
Posted: Fri May 22, 2015 6:02 pm Post subject:
The 08-09 team was a lot stronger than the 09-10 team, but it's not even a top twenty all-time team, let alone top five. Nearly got taken out by a Houston Rockets team without Yao Ming. _________________ Damian Lillard shatters Dwight Coward's championship dreams:
Boy do these stats people love to tell a good story. _________________ A banana is killed every time a terrible thread or post is made. Save the bananas. Stop creating terrible posts!
all these team stats tell you is how good teams are vs. the opposition they against at that time. it doesn't tell you how good they are across the years. sure the warriors might be dominating their opposition more than the early 00s Lakers in the regular season, but that doesn't mean they were better. the Lakers could've been playing much tougher opponents.
Actually they do in fact tell you how good teams were across years. Like through the entire history of each franchise if I understand correctly.
And yes, the Lakers could have been playing tougher opponents. But we have data that measures the strength of teams as well.
I am agnostic here. I have my memories of those Kobe-Shaq teams, but I am also willing to concede that maybe teams are better now. Does that mean that the Warriors of today would beat a team with Shaq? No. Does it mean that they would beat the Webber Kings? No. But the overall field might be better. I haven't looked over the data, so I try not to have knee-jerk reactions.
Just because your memories or eyes don't tell you the same thing as actual data, it doesn't make the data wrong. There is a reason we rely on actually recording events that happened--they don't lie, whereas our eyes and memories usually do.
Data is no better or worse than the way it is being used. It is how data is grouped that makes it meaningful. When aggregating data, there is always a sniff test involved. If you cannot verify your findings based on observation, there needs to be a hell of a lot more scrutiny or you can end up in some pretty silly territory.
I haven't looked at the data, but it smells funny on the surface.
Absolutely, but I don't think the OP really looked into this study either. There is a knee jerk reaction around here of people discounting any study that is counter-intuitive to their experience (well not just here, it goes in every area of human experience).
I don't really care--this business of trying to compare teams and players across eras is ultimately futile. You can really only say who is the best in their time period. And from my scan of this article, that really seemed to be what Silver was getting at. The "all-time" best thing is just click bait.
This is why just looking at stats is stupid. Each of the first 3 Lakers championship teams of the 2000s were exponentially better than the 2009 team. Kobe was better in 2001 and 2002 and we all know there is no comparison between Pau and Shaq. The 2000 Lakers team is arguably the deepest squad Kobe ever played with. I mean Rick Fox, Robert Horry, and Derek Fisher were all coming off the bench for goodness sake.
This years Warriors team would not have had a chance against last years Thunder or Spurs. They have largely benefitted from playing during a year where many of the top players around the league were getting injured as well as the stud rookies. The last couple of years have been a down era for the league in general.
It would closer than you think this years Warriors if they win the title have an argument to be top 5 all time, their team stats say so
Live in the bay and some warrior fan friends talking about how this warrior team is better than any of the shaq-kobe led lakers and only comes up short vs maybe the bulls for all time rankings. they got this from the stats the warriors put up this year. Great year but i dont see them dominating anyone.
Since 2000 i think the below teams can take the warriors easily. Shaq-kobe would wipe them out quickly although the 02 version may struggle a bit.
Make up some random number that fits what you want it to say, give it a name and presto-digo, it's reality. (bleep) Please! _________________ “It took many years of vomiting up all the filth I’d been taught about myself, and half-believed, before I was able to walk on the earth as though I had a right to be here.”
― James Baldwin, Collected Essays
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29152 Location: La La Land
Posted: Sat May 23, 2015 6:41 pm Post subject:
So the best Laker team EVER was the '08-'09 Lakers?
I think Craig Ehlo off of memory might provide a more accurate list of NBA champions than this Elo stat. _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
No disrespect to the 09 team, but they shouldn't be that high. To rank a team that hasn't even won a championship yet over all the great teams of the 1980's, the three peat teams in the early 2000's, hell they shouldn't even be over the 2010 team. All of those teams had at least two Hall of Famers while the Warriors currently only have one. Just mind boggling this list is.
I can't help, but think guys like Magic, Kareem, Big Game James, Pat Riley, Kobe, Shaq, Phil Jackson, and the rest of them are laughing their asses off at such a list.
All you need to know is the 1987 Lakers would beat any of the teams mentioned in a 7 game series. Yea that includes the Jordan Bulls from the 90's. All of them. _________________ It's winnin' time!
This is why just looking at stats is stupid. Each of the first 3 Lakers championship teams of the 2000s were exponentially better than the 2009 team. Kobe was better in 2001 and 2002 and we all know there is no comparison between Pau and Shaq. The 2000 Lakers team is arguably the deepest squad Kobe ever played with. I mean Rick Fox, Robert Horry, and Derek Fisher were all coming off the bench for goodness sake.
This years Warriors team would not have had a chance against last years Thunder or Spurs. They have largely benefitted from playing during a year where many of the top players around the league were getting injured as well as the stud rookies. The last couple of years have been a down era for the league in general.
It would closer than you think this years Warriors if they win the title have an argument to be top 5 all time, their team stats say so
I don't care about the stats. This was a down year in the NBA. To be more specific, the NBA has been down for about 2 years now. Tons of injuries to star players. A couple of bad drafts resulting in not too many young stars. All the old time greats becoming a little over the hill. I've simply not been impressed by the quality of opposition they are presumably dominating.
The Celtics teams of 2008 and 2009 were amazing. The Heat teams of 2011-2013 were amazing. The Lakers of 2008-2010 were amazing. I would take all 3 of those teams to easily beat this years Warriors. EASILY. Hell I think Dwights 2009 Magic team would give em a run of their money.
The last 2 years have been pretty weak for the NBA IMO.
No way the warriors stand a chance against the Shaq lakers teams.
Better question is would the warriors would even have made it through OKC if KD had been healthy?
Not to knock what they have did but lets be honestly the NBA is going through a period of weakness. They went through the Pelicans and Clippers now the Rockets who really shouldn't be here either. On the east a depleted Cavs teams is wiping the floor with Hawks (whom nobody thought was for real way back during the reg season). Put any one of those 2000's Lakers teams in todays NBA and they would win 75 games.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum