Are 70 wins too many?

I swear there have been teams in the NBA that could have run the table during the regular season. They were that good. The Chicago Bulls team that won 72 of 82 games in 1995-96 was one of them, but there have been a few others down through the years. The current Lakers team appears capable of winning 70 or more, assuming they avoid injuries and the sort of inner turmoil that could derail a talented team.

The question is, do they want to expend that much energy? It might be unwise, particularly if they have a goal of winning a second straight NBA title. Push too hard and they might go off the rails. Better to coast through the regular season, win whatever it takes to secure the best record in the Western Conference and focus on a title charge.

It’s just my opinion. What do you guys think?

Facebook Twitter Plusone Digg Reddit Stumbleupon Tumblr Email
  • Tony

    I think a team needs to establish home court for the playoff run. So if the 70 wins is within that scope then so be it. 70 plus wins are good water cooler stats but if it leads to fatigue and injuries during the playoffs it’s not worth risking the ultimate prize.

    I can fairly surmise that that had the 72 win Bulls had not won the NBA crown that… the season would have been deemed a failure by anyone’s standards.

  • bing

    What’s the definition of coasting? Are we talking about resting starters in late-season unimportant games against non-playoff teams?
    That I can get behind.

    Otherwise, play to win every game

  • B

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMk5sMHj58I

    Unless, like bing said, you rest certain players who are sore or have minor injuries.