PDA

View Full Version : Curry, Klay + Dray: Most wins by trio?



JasonJohnHorn
04-07-2016, 07:06 PM
Bird, McHale, and Parish had the record for most wins by a trio, and it was broken by Duncan, Manu, and Parker. The thing is, that trio didn't start playing together until Duncan was already 26.



The Curry, Klay and Dray, though, started playing together when Curry was 24, and they've been racking up crazy win totals the last couple of years.

What is the likelihood that they catch up wit this record? TD & Co. have over 700, but the GSW trio has close to a third of that (234 right now).


Harden, KD and Westy could have chased it, but KD, Westy and Ibaka still could (if they stay together). They have 370.


Is this an untouchable record? Or does anybody had a chance of breaking this?

Vinylman
04-07-2016, 07:11 PM
smfh...

at 60 wins a year they wouldn't catch them in 8 seasons...

PSD... where remedial math rules!!!!!

JasonJohnHorn
04-07-2016, 09:10 PM
smfh...

at 60 wins a year they wouldn't catch them in 8 seasons...

PSD... where remedial math rules!!!!!

I get it. You don't like me. So you use a stawman argument.

I didn't say they'd get there in 8 years, so how are my math skills remedial?


Manu, Parker, and Duncan have played together for 14 years; is it so unbelievable that were Curry, Klay, and Dray to play for 13-15 years they might be in position to match or eclipse that total?

And is it unreasonable to assume that the might have 60-win season over the next couple of seasons?

I mean... they are on pace for 72 win this year, and got 65 wins last year, and their young core is entering their prime, and they have cap space to bring somebody like KD on board to add to that trio.

But you would rather take an opportunity to $#!t on somebody than contribute to the conversation.

Why? Because that is who you are. Have a night cap and listen to some of your Neil Diamond and Barbara Striesand records.

Jeffy25
04-07-2016, 09:14 PM
^ I don't think you know what a strawman argument is.


Any way.

It would take crazy longevity to get there. No promises these guys stay together long enough.

They need to play together for more than a decade, and that just doesn't really happen like it used to.

jerellh528
04-07-2016, 11:40 PM
If this topic ever becomes relevant, I doubt psd will still be around.

JasonJohnHorn
04-08-2016, 12:09 AM
^ I don't think you know what a strawman argument is.

A straw man argument:
"The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e. "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the original proposition" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)

I ask a question if a trio (Curry/Klay/Dray) could top the win total of TD/Parker/Manu (mind you, I'm not making an argument), VMan then replaces that with "in 8 years they'd have to 60 sixty games a year", 'replacing' my question with an argument set up for failure (I never said 'in 8 years' and put no time line on how long this would take); then bashes that by attacking my math skills and implying it is impossible and that the question or argument is ridiculous.

Was there another definition of strawman that you were thinking? Or are you one of those people who corrects others about stuff you don't know about?

Pretty standard strawman actually. Textbook example really.

Jeffy25
04-08-2016, 12:11 AM
A straw man argument:
"The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e. "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the original proposition" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)

I ask a question if a trio (Curry/Klay/Dray) could top the win total of TD/Parker/Manu (mind you, I'm not making an argument), VMan then replaces that with "in 8 years they'd have to 60 sixty games a year", 'replacing' my question with an argument set up for failure (I never said 'in 8 years' and put no time line on how long this would take); then bashes that by attacking my math skills and implying it is impossible and that the question or argument is ridiculous.

Was there another definition of strawman that you were thinking? Or are you one of those people who corrects others about stuff you don't know about?

Pretty standard strawman actually. Textbook example really.

Your question was



Is this an untouchable record? Or does anybody had a chance of breaking this?

His answer was


smfh...

at 60 wins a year they wouldn't catch them in 8 seasons...

PSD... where remedial math rules!!!!!


He answered your question

Shammyguy3
04-08-2016, 12:23 AM
Your question was



His answer was




He answered your question

i don't really want to get in this stupid thing you guys are debating, but Vinyl didn't answer the question at all and derailed the thread with his post as evident by this stupid thing you guys are debating and by me jumping in even though i started this post with a "i don't really want to [but i will anyway]" line

Jeffy25
04-08-2016, 12:33 AM
i don't really want to get in this stupid thing you guys are debating, but Vinyl didn't answer the question at all and derailed the thread with his post as evident by this stupid thing you guys are debating and by me jumping in even though i started this post with a "i don't really want to [but i will anyway]" line

Then to make this full circle and back to topic.

The question was....can they beat the Spurs trio?

Yes, but it would take incredible longevity and great health. At least 8 great seasons worth.....

Monta is beast
04-08-2016, 02:57 AM
Curry said he wants to be a warriors for life. I dont see anyone of them leaving honestly i could be wrong but they all compliment each other perfectly.

Vinylman
04-08-2016, 08:17 AM
I get it. You don't like me. So you use a stawman argument.

I didn't say they'd get there in 8 years, so how are my math skills remedial?


Manu, Parker, and Duncan have played together for 14 years; is it so unbelievable that were Curry, Klay, and Dray to play for 13-15 years they might be in position to match or eclipse that total?

And is it unreasonable to assume that the might have 60-win season over the next couple of seasons?

I mean... they are on pace for 72 win this year, and got 65 wins last year, and their young core is entering their prime, and they have cap space to bring somebody like KD on board to add to that trio.

But you would rather take an opportunity to $#!t on somebody than contribute to the conversation.

Why? Because that is who you are. Have a night cap and listen to some of your Neil Diamond and Barbara Striesand records.

The premise of the thread is idiotic and demonstrates your basic lack of math skills when you combine the age of players, the fact that SA is still adding to the record, and the distance they are from the record...

your threads are generally pointless and whenever someone points out a different view you take it personally...

sorry you can't seem to understand that...

IBleedPurple
04-08-2016, 08:28 AM
Another useless JJH thread. Awesome.

valade16
04-08-2016, 09:04 AM
I'm still trying to figure out how the Warriors averaging 60 wins for the next 8 seasons is some crazy notion.

The last 3 seasons they've averaged 63 wins a season. Heck the Spurs have averaged 57 wins a season for the last 8 seasons.

Vinylman
04-08-2016, 10:14 AM
I'm still trying to figure out how the Warriors averaging 60 wins for the next 8 seasons is some crazy notion.

The last 3 seasons they've averaged 63 wins a season. Heck the Spurs have averaged 57 wins a season for the last 8 seasons.

except those guys haven't averaged 63 wins... this isn't really that difficult

JasonJohnHorn
04-08-2016, 10:56 AM
The premise of the thread is idiotic and demonstrates your basic lack of math skills when you combine the age of players, the fact that SA is still adding to the record, and the distance they are from the record...

your threads are generally pointless and whenever someone points out a different view you take it personally...

sorry you can't seem to understand that...

More personal insults. Great addition to the conversation!

We get it... you're an @$$#ole who has to insult people you don't like rather than participating in the conversation.

Had the same question been asked of the Spurs in 06 topping Bird/McHale/Parish,, somebody like you could have easily come up with the same response, and they'd have been wrong.

Curry is the oldest of the group and he's 27. There's nothing saying he'll only play to 35, and should he, like Kidd and Nash, play until he's 39 or 40, which his shooting ability will allow him to do should he want and barring injury, there's no reasons that this trio couldn't win that many games.

That said, given that they just won 70 games this year, and won 67 last year, it doesn't seem unreasonable to assume they might have a couple more 65-win seasons over the next could years, and if they keep their core in tack, a couple more 60 wins after that.

But you'd rather just insult people and claim somebody lacks basic math skills when they haven't even offer a mathematical formula.

Is this what gets your through the day in life? If so, I suggest you find a more productive outlet.

JasonJohnHorn
04-08-2016, 11:06 AM
Your question was



His answer was




He answered your question

You are being willfully ignorant to what he said.

He used the 8-year mark (which I never mentioned) to imply I didn't have remedial math skills.


Now Jeffy (or should I call you Vinyl man because this is clearly an alt account or you are best buddies), you can go on like you know what you are talking about, or acknowledge that you off base about this.

And your needless defense of somebody who is clearly being antagonistic and not contributing to the conversation belays an overt bias. Are you here to have a conversation about basketball? Or defend somebody who just entered the thread to insult me, like you also defended him in the other thread (and I'm not sure how many others).


Right.

JasonJohnHorn
04-08-2016, 11:10 AM
Another useless JJH thread. Awesome.

IBleedPurple: Hi... just here to insult people, not to contribute.

JJH: Thanks.



If aren't interested in the conversation, don't participate.

With the match-up between the Spurs and Warriors the other night, I thought this would be interesting to talk about. You don't agree. Fine. But the board has been dead lately and I don't see you making any interesting contributions.


It you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem, and not contributing anything but insults is part of the problem.

Vinylman
04-08-2016, 12:08 PM
More personal insults. Great addition to the conversation!

We get it... you're an @$$#ole who has to insult people you don't like rather than participating in the conversation.

Had the same question been asked of the Spurs in 06 topping Bird/McHale/Parish,, somebody like you could have easily come up with the same response, and they'd have been wrong.

Curry is the oldest of the group and he's 27. There's nothing saying he'll only play to 35, and should he, like Kidd and Nash, play until he's 39 or 40, which his shooting ability will allow him to do should he want and barring injury, there's no reasons that this trio couldn't win that many games.

That said, given that they just won 70 games this year, and won 67 last year, it doesn't seem unreasonable to assume they might have a couple more 65-win seasons over the next could years, and if they keep their core in tack, a couple more 60 wins after that.

But you'd rather just insult people and claim somebody lacks basic math skills when they haven't even offer a mathematical formula.

Is this what gets your through the day in life? If so, I suggest you find a more productive outlet.

nice math... curry is 28 not 27

Last time I checked a warrior win doesn't equal a trio win... Is that advanced math or something?

This thread "might" be relevant in 5 years... today it is meaningless

Vinylman
04-08-2016, 12:11 PM
You are being willfully ignorant to what he said.

He used the 8-year mark (which I never mentioned) to imply I didn't have remedial math skills.


Now Jeffy (or should I call you Vinyl man because this is clearly an alt account or you are best buddies), you can go on like you know what you are talking about, or acknowledge that you off base about this.

And your needless defense of somebody who is clearly being antagonistic and not contributing to the conversation belays an overt bias. Are you here to have a conversation about basketball? Or defend somebody who just entered the thread to insult me, like you also defended him in the other thread (and I'm not sure how many others).


Right.

LMFAO

two intelligent people with an opposite view to yours can't be anything more than buddies or a dupe account...

this **** is pure gold...


Hey Jeffy good to know we are buddies and always agree LMFAO

FlashBolt
04-08-2016, 12:12 PM
Assuming they stay together for the required period, there is no doubt they can do it. But again, way too many factors fall into this so if I'm a betting man, I would say no.

Vinylman
04-08-2016, 12:14 PM
IBleedPurple: Hi... just here to insult people, not to contribute.

JJH: Thanks.



If aren't interested in the conversation, don't participate.

With the match-up between the Spurs and Warriors the other night, I thought this would be interesting to talk about. You don't agree. Fine. But the board has been dead lately and I don't see you making any interesting contributions.


It you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem, and not contributing anything but insults is part of the problem.

you should be glad we are all posting in here... if we weren't it would be another one of your threads with no one replying.

albertajaysfan
04-08-2016, 01:33 PM
Hey JJH,

I understand the temptation to engage with the negativity, don't get sucked in too far!

Now back to the topic at hand. Nice thought exercise I like it. It is totally within the realm of possibilities. I actually think at this point in time in depends on the status of Duncan and Ginobili more than anything else. They play one more season the Golden State trio have a shot. Anything more than that and the sheer longevity required makes it highly unlikely. At this point in time I would say they have the best shot out of anyone to do it though.

Thanks for making an intelligent thread that requires thinking.

Cheers.

valade16
04-08-2016, 02:13 PM
except those guys haven't averaged 63 wins... this isn't really that difficult

Well yeah if you want to go back 4 years ago when Green was a rookie who played 13 MPG. But the last 3 seasons they've won 51, 67, and 70 wins.

I think it's more likely they play as they've been playing when all are starting as opposed to how they played when Green barely played don't you?

Besides, even if we want to completely disregard context the Warriors with all 3 have averaged essentially 59 wins per season (47, 51, 67, 70 / 4 = 58.75), 1 off your number. So yeah, they're basically on pace lol.

This really isn't that difficult.

ewing
04-08-2016, 02:35 PM
Another useless JJH thread. Awesome.

i like his threads

ewing
04-08-2016, 02:38 PM
back to the question. could they? yes. do i see it as likely, no. its more likely that someone gets hurt, falls out of favor and leaves, retires before happens. Like you said though if someone said it about the Spurs.....

mngopher35
04-08-2016, 02:46 PM
Even if they do it would only last a couple years, then that record will belong to lavine/wiggins/towns...?

lakerfan85
04-08-2016, 05:19 PM
Well yeah if you want to go back 4 years ago when Green was a rookie who played 13 MPG. But the last 3 seasons they've won 51, 67, and 70 wins.

I think it's more likely they play as they've been playing when all are starting as opposed to how they played when Green barely played don't you?

Besides, even if we want to completely disregard context the Warriors with all 3 have averaged essentially 59 wins per season (47, 51, 67, 70 / 4 = 58.75), 1 off your number. So yeah, they're basically on pace lol.

This really isn't that difficult.

Don't they have to actually play in the game for it to count as a win? Like if one of them is injured and misses a game I don't believe it counts..

Monta is beast
04-08-2016, 05:49 PM
Even if they do it would only last a couple years, then that record will belong to lavine/wiggins/towns...?

Thats wishful thinking. Your saying that there gonna become one of the greatest teams of all time, if not the best. Doubt that happens

Monta is beast
04-08-2016, 05:50 PM
Let them win 35 games in a season before you give them most in history by a trio #homer

JasonJohnHorn
04-08-2016, 05:53 PM
LMFAO

two intelligent people with an opposite view to yours can't be anything more than buddies or a dupe account...

this **** is pure gold...


Hey Jeffy good to know we are buddies and always agree LMFAO

'Intelligent'?

Right... one guy uses a strawman argument, the other doesn't know what one is.

So sorry I missed Curry's b-day in March. He was 27 to start the season. Does his having a birthday last month change the conversation, or the fact that you just came in here to p!$$ on this thread because you don't have anything better to do with your time?

JasonJohnHorn
04-08-2016, 05:54 PM
Hey JJH,

I understand the temptation to engage with the negativity, don't get sucked in too far!

Now back to the topic at hand. Nice thought exercise I like it. It is totally within the realm of possibilities. I actually think at this point in time in depends on the status of Duncan and Ginobili more than anything else. They play one more season the Golden State trio have a shot. Anything more than that and the sheer longevity required makes it highly unlikely. At this point in time I would say they have the best shot out of anyone to do it though.

Thanks for making an intelligent thread that requires thinking.

Cheers.

Thanks albertajaysfan. You are right.

JasonJohnHorn
04-08-2016, 05:56 PM
i like his threads

Thanks Ewing... I appreciated that, especially because I know we have disagreed on some things in the past, though we have shared similar opinions on others.

mngopher35
04-08-2016, 06:13 PM
Thats wishful thinking. Your saying that there gonna become one of the greatest teams of all time, if not the best. Doubt that happens

lol that question mark was an emoji on my phone. I was kidding. It's way too early to say with the group in this thread despite their accomplishments so I took it further and went with a 21 and under group in their first year together. We would have the advantage of starting together earlier though!

Shammyguy3
04-08-2016, 06:24 PM
Then to make this full circle and back to topic.

The question was....can they beat the Spurs trio?

Yes, but it would take incredible longevity and great health. At least 8 great seasons worth.....


I think they have a chance, however it comes down to health and Curry's health moreso than the others just like Duncan's health has always been more important than Parker or Manu


lol that question mark was an emoji on my phone. I was kidding. It's way too early to say with the group in this thread despite their accomplishments so I took it further and went with a 21 and under group in their first year together. We would have the advantage of starting together earlier though!

you just knew someone was gonna respond to that seriously :laugh2:

Scoots
04-11-2016, 06:07 PM
I think that record is untouchable. The Spurs have a lot of such records.