Does the Golden State Warriors' loss without Stephen Curry mean anything?

golden state warriors On Wednesday night, the Warriors got shellacked by the Dallas Mavericks. The Mavericks led by as many as 30 and ended up winning by a comfy 23. It's true, the Warriors were without Stephen Curry and a few other role players. The Mavericks were without their starting point guard, Deron Williams. (Oh, and two of their starters had major surgery this summer.)

Most fans probably expected the Warriors to struggle without Curry and his unreal shooting performance, but they certainly didn't expect this: both Klay Thompson and Draymond Green were held to 4-of-15 shooting, with Klay scoring 10 points and Draymond dropping 11 points. For two players who are ranked by many as the top players at their position, that's a disapointing stat line, to say the least.

But again, the Warriors were without Steph Curry. So, does this loss mean anything? Or, to put it in another way, does the Mavericks' win mean anything? Given that the Warriors still had Klay Thompson, the self-proclaimed best Shooting Guard in the league, Draymond Green, a Defensive Player of the Year candidate, and Andre Iguodala, last season's Finals MVP, is the Mavericks' win still impressive?

What do you think?