FanPost

Regular Season Immortality and You: A Beginner's Guide

Nelson Chenault-USA TODAY Sports

In the last gamethread, belilaugh, Naticus and I had a brief discussion about whether the Warriors should push hard with regular season immortality in mind, or if they'd be better served pulling a Budenholzer and find unorthodox ways of both resting starters (platooning them in like Jackson, etc.), which would probably lead to some avoidable losses.

For context; the Warriors are both

a) in striking distance for a 3-way tie with the 72 Lakers and 97 Bulls for the 2nd-most wins ever

b) two wins away from locking up homecourt through the playoffs--although that's assuming Atlanta wins out the rest of their seven games, which is unlikely given Coach Bud's aforementioned affinity for resting players at the cost of wins.

It's not like the Warriors are playing the Timberwolves seven times in a row, either. If they want that record, they'd have to fight for it, with four teams on the schedule clinching Western playoff spots (and a fifth still in the fray). It'd take Kerr deliberately gunning for the record for us to win out and attain the goal of Regular Season Immortality.

But... Wait. Define Immortality for Me.

Let's say we lose out and finish 62-20. Unlikely, but more likely than us winning out. What's your guess of how many teams will have finished with a better record than that since the turn of the century? Don't look it up--this is a test of you, a microcosm of the collective schema of NBA fans. Keep in mind, too, that you're not just any NBA fan, either--you're part of the 1%. A fan who's reading this on a basketball blog on your free time. You are part of the elite, the type of fan who will get a far more accurate answer than any Joe Schmo.

Anyway's, what'd you come up with? I'm willing to bet you at least undershot it by a bit. Try 10 in the last 15 years with a better win percentage (this includes the 2012 Spurs and Bulls, who finished with a few thousandths better win percentage than 62-20 would give you). So it's not just not uncommon to do what we've done--you can expect to see a team finish in the ballpark of what we've achieved as far as win/loss every 1.5 seasons--twice every 3 years.

At this point you're ready to regurgitate every team stat the Warriors lead in all over your keyboard. But hang on--we're not talking about teams that have led in pace and defensive rating. No, this isn't an advanced statistics article: we're talking about immortality. Immortality is far too sexy a concept for advanced stats. Because let's be honest: immortality means you were so great even the stupidest idiot from Dumbville knows that you dominated. Jordan's '96 campaign. 72 wins. Boom. That's all you need to know. A double digit point differential? Most casual NBA fans don't even know what you're talking about, forget about them appreciating the magnitude of such an accomplishment. That's not immortality. Immortality is 72 wins. Glamor. Dominating the most basic, eye-catching statistics. Something that can be internalized and remembered by not only the guy who has a basketball blog bookmarked and is an active member on it, but also the guy who works 9-5 and spends weekends with his kids and watches his team maybe once every other week. If you want to argue the Warriors' legendary pythag makes them immortalized in the annals of basketball history; that the 9-5 guy from earlier will remember that that one Warrior team with Steph Curry a few years ago was #1 in offensive and defensive efficiency; then we have fundamentally different opinions on how much the casual fans who make up the bulk of the NBA fanbase are willing to remember.

So, by the metric I believe is not just the most important, but the only measuring stick people will be using when deciding which current teams to canonize 30 years from now, win/loss records, the Warriors aren't actually doing anything that out of the ordinary. Two seasons ago the Heat won 66 games--which, seeing as how the Warriors will neither run the table the next 7 games nor will they lose out, is one of the more likely final records for the Warriors--and not one broadcaster has mentioned it. LeBron also won 66 games in '09. So did the Celtics the year before that. We all remember how the Mavs won 67 games in 2007 because we were the ones to beat them. I bet we also remember who the first 8 seed to beat a 1 seed in a 7 game series was (hint: us). For those of you reading who don't live in the Bay, ask a fan of a different team how many wins the Mavs had 8 years ago. It's just not important because they didn't win when it mattered.

A wise man once said "if you're not first, you're last" (okay, that's a Ricky Bobby quote). That adage is true. We won't win 73 games. It'd take maximum effort and considerable luck, on top of the conscious sacrifice of energy and an increased risk of injury in order to come into that aforementioned 3-way tie for second. We don't get a trophy in July for cracking 65 wins in the regular season. Back when LeBron was without a Larry O'Brien of his own, he never rested on his laurels and said "Well, at least I won 66 games that one year". Neither did the '04 Pistons, who also finished with more wins than the Warriors have currently. It is simply not worth possibly jeopardizing anything to push for records that will be recorded but not remembered.

This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!