What if they go 72-10 or 71-11 this year and win the title, does

>>74377188
>negate last years' choke job
no, nothing can undo that.
it would give them a reasonable argument for being as good or better than the 95-96 bulls

>>74377188
>be ahead 2-1 in finals matchup

You are forgetting their first championship has a huge asterisks next to it because kyrie and kevin love were both injured. Nice try tho cuck

if they dont win the title it will be the biggest fucking disappointment in the entire nba
4 all stars and 2 superstars not winning the finals would be hilarious

>>74377911
>Implying Cavs don't have the same huge asterisk with Apemond suspended in G5, Curry magically fouled out in G6 and Bogut injured for the series

does Brady's two rings post 18-1 make up for 18-1?

They're 48-9 right now. I don't think they're going to finish 72-10.

>>74378780
Drayboon's nigger behavior is not unexpected. That does not deserve an *
He should have been suspended against the thunder, which would have prevented the warriors from even making the finals.

>>74378801
Yes. If Warriors win 2 more rings it makes it up for that ONE Finals loss. They still hold the 73-9 record which will never be touched in NBA History and every player not on Jordans' Bulls or Russells' Celtics has took a L in the Finals before.

>>74378987
>which would have prevented the warriors from even making the finals.

Wrong. If Draymond was suspended against Thunder he would've got suspended in G4 (he kicked Adams in the nuts in G3) Warriors LOST G4 with him anyways which put them in a 3-1 hole that they came out of.

>>74377188
this >>74377899
It's like asking if the Pats' win negates 18-1