Warriors chase to 33

[LAD]

I agree. This whole notion that it's a completely different team is inaccurate at best. The only person that isn't available is David Lee who now plays for Boston.

Still though, I go with winning streaks as an in-season thing. But going 23-0 is still pretty cot damn impressive.

I hear ya...I just think since the record is consecutive wins in a regular season is why they're counting last season.

 

[LAD]

I agree. This whole notion that it's a completely different team is inaccurate at best. The only person that isn't available is David Lee who now plays for Boston.

Still though, I go with winning streaks as an in-season thing. But going 23-0 is still pretty cot damn impressive.

And Lee came off the bench and didn't play much early on because he was hurt.

 

[bksballer89]

Crazy thing is that they're only 2 games ahead of last year pace. I forgot they got off to a great start last year as well

 

[ManuForever]

I hear ya...I just think since the record is consecutive wins in a regular season is why they're counting last season.

I don't agree with it. I know the teams aren't completely different but I'd much rather see the record broken in one season. The media is obviously going to disagree with it and go crazy when they break it. Then I'll have to stop watching ESPN and all Sports Media...

 

[LAD]

I don't agree with it. I know the teams aren't completely different but I'd much rather see the record broken in one season. The media is obviously going to disagree with it and go crazy when they break it. Then I'll have to stop watching ESPN and all Sports Media...

LOL
Stop watching ESPN & all Sports Media is a little extreme, no?

 

[ManuForever]

LOL
Stop watching ESPN & all Sports Media is a little extreme, no?

Probably. I over-exaggerate a lot.

 

[Hornsstampede2.0]

33 in one season is the record

Half the struggle is staying healthy. Eventually someone super important gets hurt or sick.

The 1969 Lakers did not get 4 months off to heal up and re-energize in the middle of the streak.

 

[Robotech]

I don't have a problem with counting the streak over two seasons, but postseason losses shouldn't be ignored. All games that matter should count. The streak is really 26 in my mind. They won the last 3 against Cleveland in the Finals last season and they've won the first 23 games this season.

I feel the same way about individual statistics. The postseason shouldn't be ignored in that regard either. For example, why do we say that Hank Aaron only has 755 career home runs when he really hit 761? Are we saying that those 6 postseason home runs aren't that important? Babe Ruth really had 729 HR's that mattered.

 

[ChrisGar15]

I don't have a problem with counting the streak over two seasons, but postseason losses shouldn't be ignored. All games that matter should count. The streak is really 26 in my mind. They won the last 3 against Cleveland in the Finals last season and they've won the first 23 games this season.

I feel the same way about individual statistics. The postseason shouldn't be ignored in that regard either. For example, why do we say that Hank Aaron only has 755 career home runs when he really hit 761? Are we saying that those 6 postseason home runs aren't that important? Babe Ruth really had 729 HR's that mattered.

Interesting -- but I've never heard of anyone saying this before.

Quick check -- Babe Ruth & Roger Maris would have had 62 HRs if you include post season.

As the number of post season games have increased ... it would skew these numbers.

 

[FORKWDEVIL]

NOT

 

[trojanfan12]

Well, we don't have to worry about whether it's over 1 or 2 seasons anymore.

 

[trojanfan12]

On the whether it should count over 2 seasons or just 1.

Doing it over 2 seasons, is a nice accomplishment, but it's not nearly as big as doing it in 1 season. Even if you bring back the entire team, they have had several months to rest and heal up.

The Lakers started their streak on Nov. 5, 1971 and it ended January 9, 1972. They didn't get 4 months to rest and heal in between.

 

[bksballer89]

On the whether it should count over 2 seasons or just 1.

Doing it over 2 seasons, is a nice accomplishment, but it's not nearly as big as doing it in 1 season. Even if you bring back the entire team, they have had several months to rest and heal up.

The Lakers started their streak on Nov. 5, 1971 and it ended January 9, 1972. They didn't get 4 months to rest and heal in between.

The Heat wins streak was pretty impressive also. From February 3rd-March 27th. What's more impressive about that Heat team is from February 3rd until the end of the season (April 17th) they won 37 of 39 games. That is just sick.

They went 38-3 in the 2nd half of their season that year.

 

[Lakers+USC=#1]

The only guy that's not there from last season is Lee.

Still makes it a different team.

 

[trojanfan12]

The Heat wins streak was pretty impressive also. From February 3rd-March 27th. What's more impressive about that Heat team is from February 3rd until the end of the season (April 17th) they won 37 of 39 games. That is just sick.

They went 38-3 in the 2nd half of their season that year.

And the Heat also didn't get 4 months off while accomplishing that.

 

[Lakers+USC=#1]

I agree. This whole notion that it's a completely different team is inaccurate at best. The only person that isn't available is David Lee who now plays for Boston.

Still though, I go with winning streaks as an in-season thing. But going 23-0 is still pretty cot damn impressive.

Who said it was a completely different team? One player not there, makes it a different team.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Just to be clear and every one understands - the games in the playoffs did not count towards the winning streak. The streak ended at 24. But there is still a chance that the Warriors could pull off another huge streak and even make it to that 33. The Lakers having their 33 games in a row record is not out of danger yet.

 

[Heatles84]

Who said it was a completely different team? One player not there, makes it a different team.

It's been implied earlier in this thread.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I agree with the statement that 33 games in one season is the season. The record of 33 games in two seasons, however would have been almost as impressive and right next there though. The 33 in two seasons, however is not the same even though it would have been impressive.

 

[LAD]

Still makes it a different team.

LOL how? They have the same starting core (again, Lee wasn't part of that core) and they run the same type of plays. They've all pretty much improved on an individual level so overall as a team they've shown improvement.

I think what you're saying would make better sense if we weren't talking about a bench player.