How many games will the Warriors win?

The way they've been steamrolling through the league this year, anything short of a championship has to be considered a major disappointment at the very least.

Speaking of the biggest choke job, it reminds me of the Malone/Payton's Lakers team in the Finals. Or the Clippers losing the series against the Rockets last year. How it happened was dramatic.

As for topic, it's gonna be a major disappointment for sure. But obviously biggest choke title will depend on how it goes down.

I guess it might be a bit harsh to call it choking if the Spurs take them down, but I'll stand by major disappointment.

and i stand by captain obvious and general soreness

Well, anyway, like I said, I highly doubt the Warriors' season will end in that kind of disappointment. They'll end up beating the Bulls' other record of 87 total wins, season and Playoffs, since they're already one win ahead, and teams now have to win sixteen games to capture the championship.

The curry injury can play a big factor. And maybe the western conference winner is worn down after a tough conference final allowing the East to swoop in for a finals win haha

Speaking of "chokes"- what are the biggest chokes in nba history? And let's get on the same with the meaning of choke". Getting upset is one thing. But what is your definition of choke? Blowing a 3-1 series lead?

I'm sure the Cavs are hoping that'll be the case.

Definitely, I'd say that most (if not all) comebacks from being down 1-3 would automatically qualify as choking on the part of the team that was up. Even in the case of the eighth seeded Magic who gave up a 3-1 lead to the top seeded Pistons in 2003, you've obviously played well enough to build a commanding lead, then failed to close out the series three times in a row. Seattle blowing the 2-0 series lead to Denver in 1994 would also be up there. The 1969 Lakers, 1994 Knicks, and 2010 Celtics were all up 3-2 in the NBA Finals, dropping the final two games to let the championship slip. The 2008 Lakers squandered a 24 point lead at home in Game 4 that resulted in them going down 1-3, and though they won Game 5, they were subsequently blown out by the second largest margin of victory in a Finals game in Game 6, and the largest margin of victory in a Finals-clinching game

In some cases, there's probably a fine line between a choke and an upset, and they kind of go hand in hand too. To that end, it sort of depends on how you look at it; that is, whether you want to credit the winners, or blame the losers. If I had to define it, I'd say that a choke would involve:

• Giving up a significant lead, especially in a key/pivotal game, leading to a loss.
• Performing badly in clutch situations - "cracking under the pressure" - resulting in a loss.
• Being unable to take advantage of a favourable situation (eg blowing a 3-1 lead, losing the last two games at home, losing a series to an inferior team despite home court advantage, and so on)
• Failing to perform to capability and expectation overall (eg a 60+ win team is manhandled and eliminated by a team that barely scraped into the Playoffs, playing terribly in Game 7 of an otherwise competitive series, etc).
• In the most egregious cases, a combination of some or all of the above.

With the way the Warriors have been playing this season, if they do fall short of the championship, then I think it's fair to say that some choking was involved. That lessens as they progress through to the Conference Finals (assuming they face the Spurs there), and then increases as they face whoever comes out of the East. In all fairness, how much of a choke it is would come down to who they lost to, and how they lost, but nevertheless I'd say that becoming the first team to lose less than ten games in the regular season, dominating the competition, and then not winning the championship, has to be considered a choke, at least on some level.

That's how I see it, anyway. What's your definition of a choke? And if choke is the wrong vernacular to use here, would you instead say that the Warriors failing to capture the title after winning 73 games would be the most disappointing overall result that a team has ever suffered, given their capabilities and the logical expectations? I mean, whatever terminology we run with, a team setting so many records and looking so unbeatable throughout the regular season, only to fall short of the championship, is significant for all the wrong reasons.

Much appreciated- a well thought out post there.

I can get on board with most of that.

To that end, it sort of depends on how you look at it; that is, whether you want to credit the winners, or blame the losers

I agree.
Did NYK choke against the Bulls in ‘93? They were up 2-0 heading to MSG and ended up losing in the next 4 closely contested matches (except game game 3 haha)

Those 94 nuggets. A great upset. Maybe some will point out how Kemp couldn’t hit a shot at the basket against Mutombo while others choose to remember some hero ball by robert pack or Mutombo with some remarkable defensive efforts

Kenyon Martin going 3 for 20 something in an elimination game in the finals was terrible but i think was more of a result of duncan’s defensive awesomeness

What comes to mind as a “choke” is starks empty performance in game 7 of the 94 finals. Riley kept on drawing up the plays for him, he had the open shots, but they just didn’t fall.

not winning the championship, has to be considered a choke, at least on some level.

Of course there’s some level of choke/major disappointment should the warriors not win the title... for any contending team for that matter. I think that goes without saying which is why i had those captain obvious comments.

I will leave major disappointment/most disappointing result/etc to the experts to debate should the Warriors not become NBA champion... and the same if the Warriors won it. Regular season success/dominance does not always translate to postseason success. I was crushed when the 2011 bulls lost to the cavs in the conf. Semi’s. What was my level of disappointment? Who gives a shit. They lost.

when i went to the Bulls championship rallies at Grant park it was fucking awesome. Were they better than '86 celts? who gives a shit. i'll remember being at championship rallies for my favorite team.

I think there is a growing sentiment of nba followers that want to see the Warriors fail and are ready with their pitchforks and fires if it happens. And if they win, they will just shrug, “well they were favored anyway”

Good question about those '93 Knicks. I mean, it's MJ and Pip in their prime, on a team with "championship pedigree", to dust off that cliche term. It's not exactly a disgraceful loss or anything. Still, I think you can say that it's a choke to some extent, because they were up 2-0, protected home court advantage, and they had a really good shot at finally getting past the Bulls during that memorable rivalry. Of course, they did do it next year while MJ was retired, and yes, Starks in Game 7 of the 1994 Finals is definitely a good example of a choke.

I'm not sure how I could forget Karl Malone in Game 1 of the 1997 Finals, either. That's another prominent example.

Would it really be one of the biggest choke jobs in nba history if GSW didn't win it?! If the Spurs beat them there's no shame in that. Or if it's OKC.

for sure it would. you dont win 73 games and not bring home the title without it being considered a choke.