My buddy Dan the Man is a knowledgeable hoops guy and big Boston Celtics fan. He’s a buddy of mine, and I put his basketball opinions up there with just about anyone. We talk a lot of NBA and recently had this text exchange about the Warriors and how many games they’d win. No, I didn’t ask him if I could post this:
Dan the Man: “I’ll tell you, man, if Steph Curry bombs from all points on the court in the fourth quarter like that all season, they will be a force. I just can’t wrap my head around that being done consistently over, say, 100 games.”
Me: “Essentially, that’s what he did last season, though not to the extreme he’s doing it now. It’s over, bruh, the Warriors figured it out, they’ve got a way and strategy of doing something that everyone’s trying to catch up to. Curry’s too good, and they always have five above-average basketball players – note, BASKETBALL PLAYERS, not guys who are simply playing basketball – on the court. It’s like a pickup basketball game where one team (the Warriors) is loaded every single game, with the best player on the floor and then about two or three more of the top players on the entire court. Meanwhile, the other team is always playing with at least one stiff – like when you were on my team. Haha.”
Dan the Man: “Sounds like you’re crowning them repeat champions a week or two into the season. Don’t do that. I don’t know, the season is way long, and obviously there’s an injury factor. Talk to me in February or March. And this talk of 72 wins is really very silly. Why do you even want to do that if it over-works players and derails a path to the title? Plus they could have easily lost the other night to the Clippers and the rhetoric would be totally different. Luke Walton should have called timeout when they went down 5 or 7 in that fourth quarter. I know it’s nit-picking but it’s true. Coaching is a possible question mark.”
Me: “Talk of 72 wins might not be silly, that’s the problem. Don’t get me wrong, I’m taking the under on that in a big way. I won’t bet against history. But they won 67 games last year and they have looked ridiculous early, handling a bunch of playoff teams and supposed contenders. And they appear to have improved. Do I think they’ll win 72? No. But I’m saying it’s not silly. In fact, with where they’re at now, what else is a story? The disrespect angle is played out. So, if not now, when do you talk about 72? If and when they’re 10-0? What about 15-0? More than that? Remember last year they were 22-3 at one point. My point: It’s not lunacy.”
Dan the Man: “And my point is I wouldn’t tax any players to get to 72 wins when a championship is the ultimate goal. Anway, they might just go 15-0 with all kinds of garbage-ass teams out there like my Celtics.”
***BTW, some people think Steinmetz’s Podcast with Sal Castaneda — called the Sal and Steiny show — ain’t bad. Check it out here, on ITUNES:
Matt Steinmetz 
A few things: Dan’s watches as many Warriors games as you do. Also, last I checked Howard Beck, Kevin Ding and Ric Bucher work for BR, so I’d take that paycheck. Third, I think you gotta lighten up some … Having a little fun with a question that people are asking. But OK, peace back at you.
LikeLike
Uhh some guy named Dan the man with no context of his knowledge of basketball other than you trust his opinion is journalism 101….Uhh plus he sounds like any one else not watching this team night in night out these past 2 seasons.i like your writing Matt especially when there’s effort no disrespect intended but damn if this wasn’t a bleacher report link I wouldn’t have read this for sure,should have titled the article “me asking my friend questions” or “Dan the man” even “sal & steinmenta pod plug” lol…hopefully next time there will be some effort in your next peice….peace.
LikeLike