Replace Pippen to Michael Jordan on 2000 Portland blazers

[sekachu]

With Pippen on the Portland blazers, they almost beat the laker in game 7.

If Michael Jordan on the Portland blazers instead of Pippen, Would they able to beat the Laker? Consider the age that MJ would be 36 which mean his condition is on declined.

[Zedja]

With Pippen on the Portland blazers, they almost beat the laker in game 7.

If Michael Jordan on the Portland blazers instead of Pippen, Would they able to beat the Laker? Consider the age that MJ would be 36 which mean his condition is on declined.
It's still Jordan.

/thread

[Jay-B]

that team was already stacked and + Jordan?? they would of beat the Lakers in 5.

[IGotACoolStory]

Jordan + Sheed>

[EricForman]

With Pippen on the Portland blazers, they almost beat the laker in game 7.

If Michael Jordan on the Portland blazers instead of Pippen, Would they able to beat the Laker? Consider the age that MJ would be 36 which mean his condition is on declined.

Yes. You know what Pippen did throughout that entire 15 point meltdown? He took one three. That's it. No rebounds, no assists, no drive at the hoop.

Id on't see how Jordan would have stood there and let the bleeding continue. Of course, i don't think it woulda gotten to that point if Jordan was on that team instead of Pip.

[OldSchoolBBall]

They definitely beat LA with a 37 year old MJ on that team instead of Pippen.

[Sakkreth]

Depends if refs still would be biased even if Jordan played for Portland, probably not + it's Jordan so yeah Portland would win that no problem, they were better that year than LA anyways.

[barkleynash]

Yes. You know what Pippen did throughout that entire 15 point meltdown? He took one three. That's it. No rebounds, no assists, no drive at the hoop.

Id on't see how Jordan would have stood there and let the bleeding continue. Of course, i don't think it woulda gotten to that point if Jordan was on that team instead of Pip.

This^^^ those blazers with the best finisher in the history of the sport (old or not) would won in 4 or 5. Kobe woulda went away from the game plan which was get the ball to Shaq(by far the best player in the league at the time) trying to outplay his idol and that would've ruined the Lakers chances.

[Funnyfuka]

With Pippen on the Portland blazers, they almost beat the laker in game 7.

If Michael Jordan on the Portland blazers instead of Pippen, Would they able to beat the Laker? Consider the age that MJ would be 36 which mean his condition is on declined.

get a job.

[chains5000]

Portland wins because of Jordan having Dunleavy fired months before the actual game.

[IGOTGAME]

obviously there is no possible way that the Lakers could win.

Replace 37 year old Jordan with Pippen on this squad vs. any championship team of the last 10 years and people's answers would be the same.

[Vienceslav]

The team with prime Shaq wins , it

[32Dayz]

[QUOTE=Vienceslav]The team with prime Shaq wins , it

[GovernmentMan]

[QUOTE=Vienceslav]The team with prime Shaq wins , it

[MaxFly]

Portland would have likely won that championship. I'm assuming Jordan was better than Pippen 2 years removed from his second retirement.

[Dragonyeuw]

Frankly, I don't see Jordan even allowing that kind of comeback like what the Lakers pulled on Portland. 15 down in the 4th quarter? And Jordan would have came up far bigger than Pippen did at the end of that game...even at 37 years old.

[AlphaWolf24]

No Pippen ......no win.

Jordan .424 winning % without Pippen and "0" winning seasons with "1" playoff win......that's "1" playoff game won in 10 tries...


sorry.....but Pippen brings so much more to a team then "stats"...the man was a great player that helped the Bull's become "winners"...

[Asukal]

sorry.....but Pippen brings so much more to a team then "stats"...the man was a great player that helped the Bull's become "winners"...

I agree. Pippen is better than Kobe as a sidekick. :cheers:

[AlphaWolf24]

I agree. Pippen is better than Kobe as a sidekick. :cheers:


Lebron says HI...


oh wait nevermind.............Pippen actually shot in the 4th sometimes after MJ was done ballhoggin:cheers:

[Soundwave]

Anyone who doesn't think the Blazers win the title in this scenario has their head up their ass.

There's not a chance in hell Jordan would allow any team to blow a 20 point 4th quarter lead with a trip to the NBA Finals hanging in the balance.

He would've hit a few shots in the 4th (unlike Pippen) to stem the tide and take the Blazers home. That's what he does. He's the greatest playoff big-shot maker in NBA history.

Everyone knows what would've happened. That Blazers team was considerably deeper than any of the Bulls teams that won titles, I'm not even sure it would've even got to game 7 in the first place.

[JohnnySic]

If Portland had made just one more basket during that meltdown, they probably win that game. So, yeah, having MJ would have helped.

[StarJordan]

jordan swept prime shaq. portland woulda won in 5.

[32Dayz]

jordan swept prime shaq. portland woulda won in 5.

Third year Shaq swept Jordan (1995).

:facepalm

[Legends66NBA7]

Third year Shaq swept Jordan (1995).

:facepalm

He did ?

[32Dayz]

He did ?

Was it a sweep?

I know the Shaq led Magic beat the Jordan led Bullz in 95.

Thought it was a sweep but it might not have been I dont remember.

:cheers:

Ah nvm it went to 6 games.

[DJ Leon Smith]

No Pippen ......no win.

Jordan .424 winning % without Pippen and "0" winning seasons with "1" playoff win......that's "1" playoff game won in 10 tries...


sorry.....but Pippen brings so much more to a team then "stats"...the man was a great player that helped the Bull's become "winners"...

One "thing" that Pippen certainly "did" is "inspire" the overuse of "quotes" in certain forum "users".

[DaHeezy]

Actually I would beg to differ. I think older Jordan would have mentally rattled this collection of headcases and the overall team performance would have faultered. Similar too what happened in Washington. The reason Portland was almost able to beat LA was because a different player was able to step up and contribute their own clutch performance. A 37 year old Jordan would still demand the ball and force the rest of the team out of their comfort zone. This 37 year old version may steal 1 games, but would have stamina amd endurance to compare to his younger self and win 4 of 7.

Don't judge Pippen on a strech on one game his overall impact to the series was much greater

[ShaqAttack3234]

It's still a close series that could be won by either team.

Portland was a quarter away from beating them, and everyone remembers that meltdown. But don't forget that the Lakers were up 3-1. The team had problems putting teams away and let Sacramento right back into the series after leading 2-0 in the best of 5 first round, and Indiana almost took them to 7 games after the Lakers were up 3-1 vs them.

Portland was more talented than LA with Pippen, and that would still be the case with Jordan instead of him, but I don't know how much better they match up with LA.

Portland was a big team with every starter except for Damon Stoudamire being a player that could post up and exploit whatever mismatch was there. That was how Dunleavy liked to coach, and that team's strength was their balance and depth as well as their defense.

In that series, their biggest weapon was Sheed who absolutely feasted on LA's power forwards, particularly Green.

The Blazers with Pippen probably had a better chance of containing Shaq as they did. I don't see 37 year old MJ being a better defender than Pippen was in 2000. Pippen was still an elite defender, especially due to his length, and his help defense on Shaq in the post was huge, that was why he was assigned to Ron Harper who wasn't an offensive threat by that point, or a good shooter. That allowed him to double Shaq whenever he caught the ball. They also had Sheed for that, and sometimes both of them went to help out, but more often than not, it was Pippen.

Jordan was always one of the best help defenders on the perimeter himself so this strategy could still be effective with Jordan assigned to Harper.

Kobe guarded Damon Stoudamire most of the series and Damon was held in check and not as big of a factor as usual. Kobe himself was contained for the first 5 games until he played really well the last 2 games, so while Shaq and Kobe really didn't go off at the same time, neither were really shut down at the same time either.

Keep in mind that Pippen himself was having an excellent series until his injury, can't remember if it was a wrist or ankle injury, and looking at the numbers, he averaged 17 ppg, 9.4 rpg, 3.8 apg and 3 spg on 46.9% shooting through the first 5 games, yet LA was still up 3-2 so it's not necessarily a matter of getting more production in Pippen's place.

Jordan would be Portland's best scorer, but that in itself doesn't guarantee a huge difference because whether it was go to Jordan for most of their points or relying less on one guy and more for a variety of guys, they were going to be capable of scoring.

If they rely on Jordan more then Portland isn't getting the same balance and production out of everyone, which doesn't necessarily make them worse, but it probably would mean exploiting their biggest match up problem less, which was Sheed, so you're probably not getting the 23+ ppg from him that they got, and as it is, LA was able to beat Portland in Sheed's two 30 point games.

He would give Portland the go to guy in the 4th that many analysts felt they lacked, so that could put them over the top. On paper, I'd agree that makes them the favorite, but many predicted Portland would win the title that year anyway so basketball isn't played on paper.

People who are saying LA would have no chance are kidding themselves.

[PrimeJohnnyDepp]

Was it a sweep?

I know the Shaq led Magic beat the Jordan led Bullz in 95.

Thought it was a sweep but it might not have been I dont remember.

:cheers:

Ah nvm it went to 6 games.

Never happened. Your head is just spinning, you make up things to not feel embarassed at your life, at this point.

[PrimeJohnnyDepp]

Never happened. Your head is just spinning, you make up things to not feel embarassed at your life, at this point.


Holy guacamole, Jordan did lose that one year. Why.

[32Dayz]

Never happened. Your head is just spinning, you make up things to not feel embarassed at your life, at this point.

LOL..? the only one embarrassing himself here is yourself you dumbf***.
:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/199505070ORL.html

Thats G1 of the 2nd Round 1995 Playoffs.

Shaq dominated Jordan and Magic win in 6 Games.

:facepalm owned

[rodman91]

+15 points & Jordan in 4th quarter..Portland would win.

[StarJordan]

Jordan kicked shaq all the way out of the conference. 96 bulls were 7-1 agaisnt the fat ***

[bizil]

MJ on Portland equals another title for MJ. MJ was still the best player in the L at 35 years old. Sure he lost some athletic ability, but in terms clutch, scoring arsenal, and all around game he was still cream of the crop. Now u had Shaq who around this time u could say was coming into the mantle of best player in the world. So if anything at 36 or 37, MJ would have been the best perimeter player in the L. Putting MJ with that Portland team would have given him his best supporting cast EVER! U got Smitty, Sheed, Damon, Detlef, Grant, Sabonis, and Bonzi! U even got Augmon and Anthony for great D. That team was one of the deepest teams I recall ever watching 1-12. Putting MJ on that team equals a definite ring. As good as that Blazers team was, they were lacking a true Batman type player.

[Mike Barrett]

It doesn't matter who you put on this Blazers' roster, we will succeed. The only times we have failed is due to favouritism of the opposition by the refs. And I must say we have had some un-ignominious luck with the loss of a legend, a true hero in Brandon Roy. We lost the greatest player to step foot on a basketball court because of a serious injury. But after all this we still stay strong as an organization, as a community, and more so, as a team. We will stay united and pursue the allusive NBA Championship.

I understand it will be tough when refs screw us over and over but with such a great organization we will overcome it all. 8 on 5? bring it on!

[97 bulls]

MJ on Portland equals another title for MJ. MJ was still the best player in the L at 35 years old. Sure he lost some athletic ability, but in terms clutch, scoring arsenal, and all around game he was still cream of the crop. Now u had Shaq who around this time u could say was coming into the mantle of best player in the world. So if anything at 36 or 37, MJ would have been the best perimeter player in the L. Putting MJ with that Portland team would have given him his best supporting cast EVER! U got Smitty, Sheed, Damon, Detlef, Grant, Sabonis, and Bonzi! U even got Augmon and Anthony for great D. That team was one of the deepest teams I recall ever watching 1-12. Putting MJ on that team equals a definite ring. As good as that Blazers team was, they were lacking a true Batman type player.
That portland team wouldn't be the best cast he ever had. The bulls already showed they were capable of winning damn near 60 games without him. Damn the man played with two other hofers, a hall of fame coach and even aan assistant coach that made it to the hall. Then you throw in toni kukoc who was arguably the best european player ever. What are you basing this on?

In repsonse to the OP question, I believe it depends on jordans situation. Assuming he plays two more seasons and goes deep into the playoffs like pippen did after the bulls, does his body hold up being 37? If so, I can see him winning another championship. But as another poster stated, that trailblazer team was volitle. I don't know if they would've responded to jordan constant brow beatings, and taunts. There may be too much in fighting. Jordan could do it, but it would need to be the perfect conditions. In no way shape or form do I see rasheed wallace putting up with jordan.

But this obviously doesn't matter cuz this is just another attempt to diminish pippen.

[AMISTILLILL]

With Pippen on the Portland blazers, they almost beat the laker in game 7.

If Michael Jordan on the Portland blazers instead of Pippen, Would they able to beat the Laker? Consider the age that MJ would be 36 which mean his condition is on declined.

Reading this just made me keep repeating "all of your base are belong to us" in my head.

[jlip]

Actually I would beg to differ. I think older Jordan would have mentally rattled this collection of headcases and the overall team performance would have faultered. Similar too what happened in Washington. The reason Portland was almost able to beat LA was because a different player was able to step up and contribute their own clutch performance. A 37 year old Jordan would still demand the ball and force the rest of the team out of their comfort zone. This 37 year old version may steal 1 games, but would have stamina amd endurance to compare to his younger self and win 4 of 7.

Don't judge Pippen on a strech on one game his overall impact to the series was much greater



In repsonse to the OP question, I believe it depends on jordans situation. Assuming he plays two more seasons and goes deep into the playoffs like pippen did after the bulls, does his body hold up being 37? If so, I can see him winning another championship. But as another poster stated, that trailblazer team was volitle. I don't know if they would've responded to jordan constant brow beatings, and taunts. There may be too much in fighting. Jordan could do it, but it would need to be the perfect conditions. In no way shape or form do I see rasheed wallace putting up with jordan.


^These^
I'm sorry. For those who are saying that the Blazers would win by replacing Pippen with MJ it's important to understand that championships are not won just by putting a better player on a team. Chemistry is almost equally important. As stated above, there is no way that I see that Blazer roster and MJ meshing.

[Duncan21formvp]

Blazers win the title. The team was too deep not to. Pippen averaged 15.1 ppg on 43% FG in that series. MJ never averaged less than 26.6 ppg in any playoff series in his career. Not to mention that after 1997 Pippen was not considered a star anymore. He made no more allstar teams after that season. Even in 1999 with Hakeem and Barkley on the team he didn't perform well either. So I'm not sure how people are acting like he was the man on the 2000 Blazers. He was probably at best the 3rd best player on that team behind Rasheed Wallace and Steve Smith.

[97 bulls]

Blazers win the title. The team was too deep not to. Pippen averaged 15.1 ppg on 43% FG in that series. MJ never averaged less than 26.6 ppg in any playoff series in his career. Not to mention that after 1997 Pippen was not considered a star anymore. He made no more allstar teams after that season. Even in 1999 with Hakeem and Barkley on the team he didn't perform well either. So I'm not sure how people are acting like he was the man on the 2000 Blazers. He was probably at best the 3rd best player on that team behind Rasheed Wallace and Steve Smith.
I agree that pippen wasn't the best player on that blazers team. But as has already been said, it takes more than talent to win a championship. I just don't see the blazers responding to jordans form of leadership. I mean, he punched steve kerr. What in the hell could steve kerr have done to warrant getting punched? I just don't see jordan and wallace (the blazers best player) meshing. Wallace was too tempermental. Especially young wallace.

A lot of you guys are acting as if the blazers were the best team ever

[sekachu]

Blazers win the title. The team was too deep not to. Pippen averaged 15.1 ppg on 43% FG in that series. MJ never averaged less than 26.6 ppg in any playoff series in his career. Not to mention that after 1997 Pippen was not considered a star anymore. He made no more allstar teams after that season. Even in 1999 with Hakeem and Barkley on the team he didn't perform well either. So I'm not sure how people are acting like he was the man on the 2000 Blazers. He was probably at best the 3rd best player on that team behind Rasheed Wallace and Steve Smith.



Not to doubt MJ, He is my favorite player ever, but I think 37 MJ might have trouble against the young talent hungry laker due to his lack of stamina plus Phil Jackson's scheme. The 98 Jordan showed his tiredness in the final. No way that he can maintain the same condition at age 37. MJ would be still better than Pippen putting up better productive stats but to say absolute win, I rather say higher chance of winning.

[magnax1]

If he's as good as pre injury Wizards Jordan, then they definitely win. They lost because when it came down to it, Smith couldn't create for them, Pippen couldn't create for them, Rasheed couldn't create for them, but both Shaq and Kobe could. Portland had a good offense because it was balanced, but that sort of offense basically never wins an NBA championship. Does anyone remember how much they scored in the 4th of that game? Maybe 10 points?

[bizil]

That portland team wouldn't be the best cast he ever had. The bulls already showed they were capable of winning damn near 60 games without him. Damn the man played with two other hofers, a hall of fame coach and even aan assistant coach that made it to the hall. Then you throw in toni kukoc who was arguably the best european player ever. What are you basing this on?

In repsonse to the OP question, I believe it depends on jordans situation. Assuming he plays two more seasons and goes deep into the playoffs like pippen did after the bulls, does his body hold up being 37? If so, I can see him winning another championship. But as another poster stated, that trailblazer team was volitle. I don't know if they would've responded to jordan constant brow beatings, and taunts. There may be too much in fighting. Jordan could do it, but it would need to be the perfect conditions. In no way shape or form do I see rasheed wallace putting up with jordan.

But this obviously doesn't matter cuz this is just another attempt to diminish pippen.


U do see I said FROM 1-12 that would have been MJ's best supporting cast EVER! Those 12 guys from Portland's team man for man was better than ANY supporting cast MJ EVER had! Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles can see that!:

50 Greg Anthony
2 Stacey Augmon
44 Brian Grant
14 Gary Grant
34 Antonio Harvey
35 Joe Kleine
5 Jermaine O'Neal
11 Arvydas Sabonis
12 Detlef Schrempf
8 Steve Smith
3 Damon Stoudamire
30 Rasheed Wallace
6 Bonzi Wells

Line up ANY Bulls team MJ had! MAN FOR MAN THIS PORTLAND TEAM HAD MORE TALENT! Now it takes more than a talented roster like this to win a ring. I'm no idiot it takes chemistry and coaching as well. But man for man, this Portland teams TRUMPS any Bulls team MJ had. I would take Damon over Paxson, BJ, or Kerr anyday. Give me Smitty over Ron Harper at that point in Ron's career. I would take Sabonis over ANY center MJ EVER HAD! I would take Bonzi, Schrempf, and Augmon over Bucheler, Levingston, Bobby Hansen, or any type of backup SG or SF they had. As good as Kukoc was, I would take Wallace at this time of his career over Kukoc. Now MJ, Pip, and Rodman are untouchable of course. But other than that, Portland had more talent man for man than MJ EVER had. But it takes more than talent. I never said this Portland team was BETTER than the MJ's Bulls. I stated man for man they had MORE TALENT. If u throw a slighty past his prime MJ (MJ was still the best player in the L at 35) at 36 or 37 with this cast, it would be MORE THAN ENOUGH to beat the Lakers and win a ring.

Before u get on here criticizing people, get your comprehension skills together first! I never said that Portland's team was GREATER than MJ"s Bulls. I SAID 1-12, THEY HAD A MORE IMPRESSIVE ROSTER. Which MJ could have done wonders with. They had great defenders in Augmon and Anthony on the perimeter. Smitty was one of the more skilled and complete SG's on the offensive side of the ball. Detlef still had gas in the tank and a couple of years before that was an All-Star with Seattle making the Finals. Put on MJ on this time at 36 or 37 in place of Pip, and they best the Lakers no doubt! That Portland team was known as very deep and versatile. But MJ with it and it means a ring. They had the Lakers so on the ropes, but blew the game in the end.

[Collie]

I watched that meltdown many times. They lost because they had no alpha dog, someone who could score when they really really needed it.

You're adding basically THE alpha dog of the NBA. While nothing is ever guaranteed, I'm giving this as big a chance as any that they win.

[sekachu]

That portland team wouldn't be the best cast he ever had. The bulls already showed they were capable of winning damn near 60 games without him. Damn the man played with two other hofers, a hall of fame coach and even aan assistant coach that made it to the hall. Then you throw in toni kukoc who was arguably the best european player ever. What are you basing this on?

In repsonse to the OP question, I believe it depends on jordans situation. Assuming he plays two more seasons and goes deep into the playoffs like pippen did after the bulls, does his body hold up being 37? If so, I can see him winning another championship. But as another poster stated, that trailblazer team was volitle. I don't know if they would've responded to jordan constant brow beatings, and taunts. There may be too much in fighting. Jordan could do it, but it would need to be the perfect conditions. In no way shape or form do I see rasheed wallace putting up with jordan.

But this obviously doesn't matter cuz this is just another attempt to diminish pippen.


Never questioned MJ's enigmatical leadership no matter how he screwed up with his teammate, otherwise he couldn't have won 3 peats (2 times) .

[bizil]

If he's as good as pre injury Wizards Jordan, then they definitely win. They lost because when it came down to it, Smith couldn't create for them, Pippen couldn't create for them, Rasheed couldn't create for them, but both Shaq and Kobe could. Portland had a good offense because it was balanced, but that sort of offense basically never wins an NBA championship. Does anyone remember how much they scored in the 4th of that game? Maybe 10 points?

Exactly right! And to be frank, MJ would have still been at worst a top 5 player in the L at 37. He was still the best player at 35 in 1998! That Portland team lacked a true Batman to carry them down the stretch, even though they still had a collection of several All Star caliber players. Smitty and Sheed are better as number two options. Even though I think Smitty's injuries early in his career cost him. If it wasn't for that, Smitty would have evolved into that kind of player. With Sheed, it was more his mentality and not injuries. The Pistons team Sheed won a title with was one of the few teams to win a title without an immortal or true HOF type player. Billups is very good and a borderline HOF guy. And is very clutch. But i feel u need a guy like Duncan, Dirk, Kobe, Shaq,Wade, etc. that can carry a team offensively,can be unstoppable no matter what, and really drive the dagger in the heart.

Almost ALL NBA Title TEAMS HAD AN ALPHA DOG, SUPERMAN, OR BATMAN! Whatever u wanna call it Some teams had more than one. I've always felt Worthy was an Alpha Dog, but he played with two guys even better than him in that sense in Magic and Kareem. List every NBA champ damn near and u will see a true alpha dog type guy or multiple ones. MJ and Portland would have been a great fit, trust me. It would be a true dynasty if it could have happened sooner in his career, I feel very similar to the dynasty he had with the Bulls. I'm beginning to question if people realize how great Smitty, Sheed, Sabonis, and Damon would be as the secondary scoring options to MJ. And to have great defenders off the bench in Augmon and Anthony with it. It's frankly ridiculous to think their would be chemistry problems with MJ and the Blazers. U have to factor in that MJ doesn't take no shit and will push a team to greatness.

[97 bulls]

U do see I said FROM 1-12 that would have been MJ's best supporting cast EVER! Those 12 guys from Portland's team man for man was better than ANY supporting cast MJ EVER had! Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles can see that!:

50 Greg Anthony
2 Stacey Augmon
44 Brian Grant
14 Gary Grant
34 Antonio Harvey
35 Joe Kleine
5 Jermaine O'Neal
11 Arvydas Sabonis
12 Detlef Schrempf
8 Steve Smith
3 Damon Stoudamire
30 Rasheed Wallace
6 Bonzi Wells

Line up ANY Bulls team MJ had! MAN FOR MAN THIS PORTLAND TEAM HAD MORE TALENT! Now it takes more than a talented roster like this to win a ring. I'm no idiot it takes chemistry and coaching as well. But man for man, this Portland teams TRUMPS any Bulls team MJ had. I would take Damon over Paxson, BJ, or Kerr anyday. Give me Smitty over Ron Harper at that point in Ron's career. I would take Sabonis over ANY center MJ EVER HAD! I would take Bonzi, Schrempf, and Augmon over Bucheler, Levingston, Bobby Hansen, or any type of backup SG or SF they had. As good as Kukoc was, I would take Wallace at this time of his career over Kukoc. Now MJ, Pip, and Rodman are untouchable of course. But other than that, Portland had more talent man for man than MJ EVER had. But it takes more than talent. I never said this Portland team was BETTER than the MJ's Bulls. I stated man for man they had MORE TALENT. If u throw a slighty past his prime MJ (MJ was still the best player in the L at 35) at 36 or 37 with this cast, it would be MORE THAN ENOUGH to beat the Lakers and win a ring.

Before u get on here criticizing people, get your comprehension skills together first! I never said that Portland's team was GREATER than MJ"s Bulls. I SAID 1-12, THEY HAD A MORE IMPRESSIVE ROSTER. Which MJ could have done wonders with. They had great defenders in Augmon and Anthony on the perimeter. Smitty was one of the more skilled and complete SG's on the offensive side of the ball. Detlef still had gas in the tank and a couple of years before that was an All-Star with Seattle making the Finals. Put on MJ on this time at 36 or 37 in place of Pip, and they best the Lakers no doubt! That Portland team was known as very deep and versatile. But MJ with it and it means a ring. They had the Lakers so on the ropes, but blew the game in the end.
You lined up the best portland players against the bulls bench. The 97 bulls were one of the most talented teams ever. What those trailblazers were was a bunch of over the hill players like sabonis and anthony and shrempf, and augmon, or really green players like oneal. Wallace was a malcontent at that time. Immature, and hotheaded. The same goes for wells. Smith was very good. But they couldn't beat the 97 bulls even without jordan.

The 97 bulls roster

Harper
Pippen
Kukoc
Rodman
Kerr
Williams
Buchler
Brown
Longley
Wennington
Parrish

That team has 2 hofers, arguably 2 of the best 5 defenders ever and the best coach ever. Hell I'm positive kukoc will eventually get into the hall of fame. They were capable of winning 55 games without jordan. The blazers team won 59 games. Remove pippen and that team implodes.

I don't believe you can even begin to compare the bulls to a team full of has beens or never was type players. There's noone on that team that will even begin to sniff the hall of fame.

[97 bulls]

If he's as good as pre injury Wizards Jordan, then they definitely win. They lost because when it came down to it, Smith couldn't create for them, Pippen couldn't create for them, Rasheed couldn't create for them, but both Shaq and Kobe could. Portland had a good offense because it was balanced, but that sort of offense basically never wins an NBA championship. Does anyone remember how much they scored in the 4th of that game? Maybe 10 points?
Don't be a fool. They lost to a better team. Id love to see how pippen would've done with 2 years rest.

[97 bulls]

Exactly right! And to be frank, MJ would have still been at worst a top 5 player in the L at 37. He was still the best player at 35 in 1998! That Portland team lacked a true Batman to carry them down the stretch, even though they still had a collection of several All Star caliber players. Smitty and Sheed are better as number two options. Even though I think Smitty's injuries early in his career cost him. If it wasn't for that, Smitty would have evolved into that kind of player. With Sheed, it was more his mentality and not injuries. The Pistons team Sheed won a title with was one of the few teams to win a title without an immortal or true HOF type player. Billups is very good and a borderline HOF guy. And is very clutch. But i feel u need a guy like Duncan, Dirk, Kobe, Shaq,Wade, etc. that can carry a team offensively,can be unstoppable no matter what, and really drive the dagger in the heart.

Almost ALL NBA Title TEAMS HAD AN ALPHA DOG, SUPERMAN, OR BATMAN! Whatever u wanna call it Some teams had more than one. I've always felt Worthy was an Alpha Dog, but he played with two guys even better than him in that sense in Magic and Kareem. List every NBA champ damn near and u will see a true alpha dog type guy or multiple ones. MJ and Portland would have been a great fit, trust me. It would be a true dynasty if it could have happened sooner in his career, I feel very similar to the dynasty he had with the Bulls. I'm beginning to question if people realize how great Smitty, Sheed, Sabonis, and Damon would be as the secondary scoring options to MJ. And to have great defenders off the bench in Augmon and Anthony with it. It's frankly ridiculous to think their would be chemistry problems with MJ and the Blazers. U have to factor in that MJ doesn't take no shit and will push a team to greatness.
What you are doing is suggesting that steve smith and rasheed wallace were on pippens and rodmans level. And that stupid remark about how that portland team with jordan wouldvve been a true dynasty as if the bulls weren't.

Frankly, its idiotic not to at least consider the nature of wallace and wells. Two malcontents. And then think that jordan is going to somehow whip them into shape.

And my god stop overrating michale jordan. He's not god. This is starting to get flat out dumb. Jordan never led bad teams to greatness. He led great teams to greatness. We've seen what jordan could do with bad teams. Your not going to be able to pit two temper mental players like jordan and wallace on the same team and they not kill each other.

And worthy was not a franchise player. Or in your terms a "batman". He was a scorer and that's it. He couldn't do anything with that laker team that was one year removed from the nba finals. Id love to hear why. He couldn't even start. Rookie george lynch started over him in 92. Is love to see how you spin that. Especially considering your stance on pippen. Pippen had a bad back, bad knees, and was older than worthy. Why didn't worthy turn into gothams avenger and take over games and lead the lakers to a better record?

[ShaqAttack3234]

Blazers win the title. The team was too deep not to. Pippen averaged 15.1 ppg on 43% FG in that series. MJ never averaged less than 26.6 ppg in any playoff series in his career. Not to mention that after 1997 Pippen was not considered a star anymore. He made no more allstar teams after that season. Even in 1999 with Hakeem and Barkley on the team he didn't perform well either. So I'm not sure how people are acting like he was the man on the 2000 Blazers. He was probably at best the 3rd best player on that team behind Rasheed Wallace and Steve Smith.

No way Pippen was their 3rd best player. He was arguably their best player, either him or Sheed.

Jordan may have never averaged less than 26.6 in a playoff series, but he probably would've have at 37 on that Blazer team with so many weapons, especially if they still go to their biggest mismatch in the series which was Sheed.

[bizil]

What you are doing is suggesting that steve smith and rasheed wallace were on pippens and rodmans level. And that stupid remark about how that portland team with jordan wouldvve been a true dynasty as if the bulls weren't.

Frankly, its idiotic not to at least consider the nature of wallace and wells. Two malcontents. And then think that jordan is going to somehow whip them into shape.

And my god stop overrating michale jordan. He's not god. This is starting to get flat out dumb. Jordan never led bad teams to greatness. He led great teams to greatness. We've seen what jordan could do with bad teams. Your not going to be able to pit two temper mental players like jordan and wallace on the same team and they not kill each other.

And worthy was not a franchise player. Or in your terms a "batman". He was a scorer and that's it. He couldn't do anything with that laker team that was one year removed from the nba finals. Id love to hear why. He couldn't even start. Rookie george lynch started over him in 92. Is love to see how you spin that. Especially considering your stance on pippen. Pippen had a bad back, bad knees, and was older than worthy. Why didn't worthy turn into gothams avenger and take over games and lead the lakers to a better record?


If u notice I said MJ, Pippen,and Rodman on that Bulls are untouchable. But as far as everyone else, the Blazers flat out had more talent on that team compared to teams MJ had in the past. So excluding Pip and Rodman, the Blazers SMASH anything the Bulls had.

U give MJ that Portland cast in the mid 90's and it would be a dynasty. We can agree to disagree. But your lack of comprehension skills is really, really laughable. MJ and Wallace wouldn't have butted heads at all. And ALL of Sheed's teammates have said he's great in the locker room. But he was hotheaded when it came to the refs. Steve Kerr said he loved playing with Sheed in Portland. MJ is the ultimate alpha dog who would have put ANYBODY in their place if needed. Just like Bird and Magic would do if necessary.

[bizil]

What you are doing is suggesting that steve smith and rasheed wallace were on pippens and rodmans level. And that stupid remark about how that portland team with jordan wouldvve been a true dynasty as if the bulls weren't.

Frankly, its idiotic not to at least consider the nature of wallace and wells. Two malcontents. And then think that jordan is going to somehow whip them into shape.

And my god stop overrating michale jordan. He's not god. This is starting to get flat out dumb. Jordan never led bad teams to greatness. He led great teams to greatness. We've seen what jordan could do with bad teams. Your not going to be able to pit two temper mental players like jordan and wallace on the same team and they not kill each other.

And worthy was not a franchise player. Or in your terms a "batman". He was a scorer and that's it. He couldn't do anything with that laker team that was one year removed from the nba finals. Id love to hear why. He couldn't even start. Rookie george lynch started over him in 92. Is love to see how you spin that. Especially considering your stance on pippen. Pippen had a bad back, bad knees, and was older than worthy. Why didn't worthy turn into gothams avenger and take over games and lead the lakers to a better record?

And with all the shit u r talking, that Blazers team had the Lakers on the ropes big time. LA just pulled one out of their ass. I feel an alpha dog like MJ would have put them over the top.

As far as Big Game James, he was a franchise type player at his peak. He was just on stacked teams with two of the top 6 GOAT. So Worthy fit in beautifully and won titles. But James could have been a scoring maching SF close to the level of Nique, King, English, etc. as a number one option. By the time James had the chance to lead the Lakers, his body was breaking down and he wasn't the same player. Big Game James had that name for a reason and a Finals MVP to show for it!

[Smoke117]

The biggest factor regarding this discussion is health. Pippen at 34 was a lot more beat up than Jordan at 36. Yes Jordan was obviously better anyway but this isn't even a fair question to ask when at the same age Jordan might as well have been 3 or 4 years younger. Pippen couldn't bring it every game on both sides of the floor anymore in every facet of the game and that's why he mostly concentrated on defense and play making and didn't bother too much with scoring with his back always on and off and his knees starting to give. Either way he's said it himself losing that game 7 was the biggest disappointment of his career and how much he laments not being more assertive scoring wise as the score dwindled away and everyone else's shots went clank, clank, clank...

[bizil]

You lined up the best portland players against the bulls bench. The 97 bulls were one of the most talented teams ever. What those trailblazers were was a bunch of over the hill players like sabonis and anthony and shrempf, and augmon, or really green players like oneal. Wallace was a malcontent at that time. Immature, and hotheaded. The same goes for wells. Smith was very good. But they couldn't beat the 97 bulls even without jordan.

The 97 bulls roster

Harper
Pippen
Kukoc
Rodman
Kerr
Williams
Buchler
Brown
Longley
Wennington
Parrish

That team has 2 hofers, arguably 2 of the best 5 defenders ever and the best coach ever. Hell I'm positive kukoc will eventually get into the hall of fame. They were capable of winning 55 games without jordan. The blazers team won 59 games. Remove pippen and that team implodes.

I don't believe you can even begin to compare the bulls to a team full of has beens or never was type players. There's noone on that team that will even begin to sniff the hall of fame.


Are u insane! Longley, Wennigton, and Parish over Sabonis. Sabonis easily smokes all of them! Smitty at the time was superior to Harper. Grant smokes Williams! Damon smokes Kerr and Randy Brown. I can go on and on. I said Pip and Rodman are untouchable. But the question is but MJ on the 2000 Blazers. Man for man, it would have been the most talented cast MJ played with. Other than Pippen and Rodman, the Blazers overwhelmingly had superior players. But it takes chemistry, great coaching, etc. to win as well. But talent wise, that Blazers team had more talent man for man. U listing that Bulls team made my point for me even more! LMBAO!

Detlef was far from washed up at this time. He was still one of the most versatile 6'10 players in the L. He was just on a deep ass team. Sabonis came in the L already hobbled. He was still one of the most skilled centers in the L. Sabonis was far from over the hill. Augmon and Anthony were still premier defenders in the L. Sure Wallace and Wells might have been immature, but they were still very good young players. Wells used to give Kobe and any other SG fits in the post. Attitude is one thing, talent is another.

Over the hill is somebody like Parish rotting on the Bulls bench. He was playing for the love of the game and more money. Hell he was the third string center on the Bulls. If Parish was anywhere close to his backend prime, he would have been starting on the Bulls. Out of prime can mean u are still an effective player but u aren't what u once were and there is a clear sharp dropoff. ALL THE GUYS ON THE BLAZERS U NAMED WERE STILL VERY EFFECTIVE AND NOT OVER THE HILL!

And lastly, I listed the Blazers team as a whole to show everybody how idiotic u really are! Once again I stated it takes more than talent to win a ring. But on paper, the Blazers team 1-12 was regarded as the deepest team in the L.

[bizil]

The biggest factor regarding this discussion is health. Pippen at 34 was a lot more beat up than Jordan at 36. Yes Jordan was obviously better anyway but this isn't even a fair question to ask when at the same age Jordan might as well have been 3 or 4 years younger. Pippen couldn't bring it every game on both sides of the floor anymore in every facet of the game and that's why he mostly concentrated on defense and play making and didn't bother too much with scoring with his back always on and off and his knees starting to give. Either way he's said it himself losing that game 7 was the biggest disappointment of his career and how much he laments not being more assertive scoring wise as the score dwindled away and everyone else's shots went clank, clank, clank...

Well said sir! That's why MJ at 36 would have put Portland over the top! I could envision a starting lineup of:

PG: Damon
SG: MJ
SF: Smitty
PF: Wallace
C: Sabonis

Bench- Grant, Bonzi, Detlef, Anthony, Augmon

Rasheed was a swiss army knife who played SF-C at this stage of his career. So u could have Sheed causing big mismatches if he played SF. Their are so many lineup possibilities u can turn to. Giving MJ this type of cast would have spelled DOOM for the Lakers in that series. What's sad is that many posters either forgot or don't know how good Damon, Smitty, Sabonis, Grant, and Bonzi were. Giving MJ this cast would have been EPIC in my book!

[97 bulls]

If u notice I said MJ, Pippen,and Rodman on that Bulls are untouchable. But as far as everyone else, the Blazers flat out had more talent on that team compared to teams MJ had in the past. So excluding Pip and Rodman, the Blazers SMASH anything the Bulls had.

U give MJ that Portland cast in the mid 90's and it would be a dynasty. We can agree to disagree. But your lack of comprehension skills is really, really laughable. MJ and Wallace wouldn't have butted heads at all. And ALL of Sheed's teammates have said he's great in the locker room. But he was hotheaded when it came to the refs. Steve Kerr said he loved playing with Sheed in Portland. MJ is the ultimate alpha dog who would have put ANYBODY in their place if needed. Just like Bird and Magic would do if necessary.
None of wallaces teammates were like jordan. It takes a special type of player to meet jordan at his level. Wallace ( a young rasheed wallace) was not that type of player. I just don't see jordan calling wallace a bum or a piece of shit and in turn he works harder. And your crazy if you feel he and jordan would mesh. I doubt wallace would even have jordan respect due to his lack of focus. Wallace was immature, he was hot headed, he was even repremanded for getting caught smoking weed. he just wasn't a championship caliber player mentally.

And if your gonna eliminate pippen and rodman, then sure the 00 blazers are better. But that's not your original point. You compared the 00 blazers minus pippen (due to the title of the thread) and said they were better than any team jordan had with the bulls (minus jordan). That includes scottie pippen and dennis rodman. And that's wrong. I wouldn't trade scottie pippen and dennis rodman for an old sabonis, rasheed wallace, steve smith, and damon stoudemire.

I also wouldn't trade brian williams, ron harper, toni kukoc, steve kerr, and luc longley for greg anthony, bonzi wells (another malcontent) brian grant, and stacey augmon etc.

[bizil]

None of wallaces teammates were like jordan. It takes a special type of player to meet jordan at his level. Wallace ( a young rasheed wallace) was not that type of player. I just don't see jordan calling wallace a bum or a piece of shit and in turn he works harder. And your crazy if you feel he and jordan would mesh. I doubt wallace would even have jordan respect due to his lack of focus. Wallace was immature, he was hot headed, he was even repremanded for getting caught smoking weed. he just wasn't a championship caliber player mentally.

And if your gonna eliminate pippen and rodman, then sure the 00 blazers are better. But that's not your original point. You compared the 00 blazers minus pippen (due to the title of the thread) and said they were better than any team jordan had with the bulls (minus jordan). That includes scottie pippen and dennis rodman. And that's wrong. I wouldn't trade scottie pippen and dennis rodman for an old sabonis, rasheed wallace, steve smith, and damon stoudemire.

I also wouldn't trade brian williams, ron harper, toni kukoc, steve kerr, and luc longley for greg anthony, bonzi wells (another malcontent) brian grant, and stacey augmon etc.

Once again I said the Blazers had a deeper pool of talent than the teams MJ played with. Meaning 1-12. Im done arguing this shit. The point of the thread was replace pip with MJ on the Blazers. The final result would be MJ beating the Lakers in that series. A leader like MJ RAISES those around him, even Rasheed. Sheed was no more of a malcontent than Dennis Rodman. Both were very emotional on the court. But neither was a locker room cancer type of guy. Bonzi wasn't a locker room cancer kind of guy either.

If we are looking at benches u really feel those Bull teams could top:

Wells, Detlef, Grant, Anthony, Augmon, O'Neal (who had mad talent but was on a deep frontcourt so minutes were hard to get. This was said back in the day during the time period.)

In comparison to Toni, Kerr, Wennigton, Randy Brown

Other than Toni, its a damn joke when comparing the benches.

U keep going back to Pippen and Rodman. Who I said were UNTOUCHABLE! But man for man, Portland had superior players! Why do u keep looking over this fact. U can't just keep leaning on Pip and Rodman when i said 1-12 the Blazers had more quality players. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THE BLAZERS HAD THE BETTER TEAM BECAUSE IT TAKES CHEMISTRY AND COACHING AS WELL! But 1-12, the Blazers had more talent. They were just missing an alpha dog type to put them over the top. The ultimate alpha dog in MJ would have put them over the top!

[97 bulls]

Are u insane! Longley, Wennigton, and Parish over Sabonis. Sabonis easily smokes all of them! Smitty at the time was superior to Harper. Grant smokes Williams! Damon smokes Kerr and Randy Brown. I can go on and on. I said Pip and Rodman are untouchable. But the question is but MJ on the 2000 Blazers. Man for man, it would have been the most talented cast MJ played with. Other than Pippen and Rodman, the Blazers overwhelmingly had superior players. But it takes chemistry, great coaching, etc. to win as well. But talent wise, that Blazers team had more talent man for man. U listing that Bulls team made my point for me even more! LMBAO!

Detlef was far from washed up at this time. He was still one of the most versatile 6'10 players in the L. He was just on a deep ass team. Sabonis came in the L already hobbled. He was still one of the most skilled centers in the L. Sabonis was far from over the hill. Augmon and Anthony were still premier defenders in the L. Sure Wallace and Wells might have been immature, but they were still very good young players. Wells used to give Kobe and any other SG fits in the post. Attitude is one thing, talent is another.

Over the hill is somebody like Parish rotting on the Bulls bench. He was playing for the love of the game and more money. Hell he was the third string center on the Bulls. If Parish was anywhere close to his backend prime, he would have been starting on the Bulls. Out of prime can mean u are still an effective player but u aren't what u once were and there is a clear sharp dropoff. ALL THE GUYS ON THE BLAZERS U NAMED WERE STILL VERY EFFECTIVE AND NOT OVER THE HILL!

And lastly, I listed the Blazers team as a whole to show everybody how idiotic u really are! Once again I stated it takes more than talent to win a ring. But on paper, the Blazers team 1-12 was regarded as the deepest team in the L.
Look biz...... if your gonna eliminate jordan, rodman and pippen and then compare the bulls to the whole blazer roster, fine. I agree, the blazers have more talent. But that wasn't your initial statement. But there's no championship team good enough to be compared to the blazers minus their best three players. The showtiime lakers minus magic, worthy and jabaar? That leaves scott, green, cooper, thompson, rambis, that's not even a 500 team. How bout the celtics without bird, parrish and mchale? What your saying isn't much.

[97 bulls]

Once again I said the Blazers had a deeper pool of talent than the teams MJ played with. Meaning 1-12. Im done arguing this shit. The point of the thread was replace pip with MJ on the Blazers. The final result would be MJ beating the Lakers in that series. A leader like MJ RAISES those around him, even Rasheed. Sheed was no more of a malcontent than Dennis Rodman. Both were very emotional on the court. But neither was a locker room cancer type of guy. Bonzi wasn't a locker room cancer kind of guy either.

If we are looking at benches u really feel those Bull teams could top:

Wells, Detlef, Grant, Anthony, Augmon, O'Neal (who had mad talent but was on a deep frontcourt so minutes were hard to get. This was said back in the day during the time period.)

In comparison to Toni, Kerr, Wennigton, Randy Brown

Other than Toni, its a damn joke when comparing the benches.

U keep going back to Pippen and Rodman. Who I said were UNTOUCHABLE! But man for man, Portland had superior players! Why do u keep looking over this fact. U can't just keep leaning on Pip and Rodman when i said 1-12 the Blazers had more quality players. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THE BLAZERS HAD THE BETTER TEAM BECAUSE IT TAKES CHEMISTRY AND COACHING AS WELL! But 1-12, the Blazers had more talent. They were just missing an alpha dog type to put them over the top. The ultimate alpha dog in MJ would have put them over the top!
I already said, if your gonna exclude pippen and rodman then sure. The blazers are better. I don't see how that makes sense cuz that wasn't your point. Your just changing it.


I also feel that if jordan at 37 replaces pippen, and he's able too come out of retirement, meaning he hasn't took the beating for 2 years and he's fresh? Sure. For that particular game, I feel jordan would've got them over the top. But I also feel if that game is replayed with pippen on the blazers 10 times, they don't relinquish that lead in 9 out of the 10

[bizil]

I already said, if your gonna exclude pippen and rodman then sure. The blazers are better. I don't see how that makes sense cuz that wasn't your point. Your just changing it.


I also feel that if jordan at 37 replaces pippen, and he's able too come out of retirement, meaning he hasn't took the beating for 2 years and he's fresh? Sure. For that particular game, I feel jordan would've got them over the top. But I also feel if that game is replayed with pippen on the blazers 10 times, they don't relinquish that lead in 9 out of the 10

At the very beginning of my post I said Pip and Rodman are untouchable and that the Blazers had no answer for them to begin with. But EVEN INCLUDING RODMAN AND PIPPEN, the Blazers had more talent 1-12! The Blazers had a deeper pool of talent flat out. I'm not changing shit! Even with Pippen and Rodman, MJ would have been playing with a DEEPER POOL OF TALENT IN PORTLAND! But I NEVER SAID DEEPER POOL OF TALENT EQUATES TO A BETTER TEAM! But MJ would have won multiple titles with that Blazers cast if he could have had that cast of characters in the mid 90's.

[Duncan21formvp]

One thing I must say is it is amazing that Portland nearly won 3 games on the Lakers homecourt that playoffs. I think it was already amazing enough they won 2 games on the road vs the Lakers who won 67 games that year.

[Smoke117]

One thing I must say is it is amazing that Portland nearly won 3 games on the Lakers homecourt that playoffs. I think it was already amazing enough they won 2 games on the road vs the Lakers who won 67 games that year.

Like I said earlier in a post it was Pippen who led them back into that series in game 5. That's why that 4th quarter haunts him so much. In that game 5 he had 22pts 6rebs 3assist 6stls 4blks 4to's 8/12fg 2/4 3pt 4/7ft and that's with dislocating two fingers in the first quarter of the game that had to be reset.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Actually I would beg to differ. I think older Jordan would have mentally rattled this collection of headcases and the overall team performance would have faultered. Similar too what happened in Washington. The reason Portland was almost able to beat LA was because a different player was able to step up and contribute their own clutch performance. A 37 year old Jordan would still demand the ball and force the rest of the team out of their comfort zone. This 37 year old version may steal 1 games, but would have stamina amd endurance to compare to his younger self and win 4 of 7.

Don't judge Pippen on a strech on one game his overall impact to the series was much greater

LMAO. Only on ISH would replacing a FAR worse player with a FAR better player (at that point in their careers especially) result in a WORSE outcome for a series. What a fukcing JOKE. :oldlol:


In no way shape or form do I see rasheed wallace putting up with jordan.

Sheed would fall in line, just like he did when Jordan played him 1-on-1 while Sheed was in college and punished him so much that Sheed was actually crying.


But I also feel if that game is replayed with pippen on the blazers 10 times, they don't relinquish that lead in 9 out of the 10

And thats why you continually overrate Pippen. Because that exact same scenario would have occurred AT LEAST 80% of the time, because that's who Pippen WAS: a tremendous all around player, defender, and facilitator, but not worth much down the stretch of games offensively (and not aggressive down the stretch). Not a truly dominant, Batman-type of player. LMAO to suggest that if that game played out for the first 38 minutes exactly as it did 10 times, that the meltdown would have only happoened that ONE time. My ass. Try AT LEAST 8 times out of 10 if not EVERY time. Get real.

[ShaqAttack3234]

But I also feel if that game is replayed with pippen on the blazers 10 times, they don't relinquish that lead in 9 out of the 10

And who says that the Blazers get that 15 point lead if the game is replayed 10 times? How many times do you expect them to hold Shaq to 9 points in the first 3 quarters?


One thing I must say is it is amazing that Portland nearly won 3 games on the Lakers homecourt that playoffs. I think it was already amazing enough they won 2 games on the road vs the Lakers who won 67 games that year.

Not really when you consider that the Blazers had more talent overall. The Lakers had the 2 best players in the series, but Portland was a stacked team and each of the Blazers starting 5 were better than the Lakers 3rd best player, and you can throw Brian Grant in there as well who was a good defender who had been really good the previous season in a bigger role and would average 15/9 the following season on Miami with more minutes. Wells and Schrempf could be dangerous given minutes and shots, particularly Wells, though due to the depth, that wasn't always the case. Even Greg Anthony was good for a back up point guard due to his defense and the fact that he hit 3s. The team was so loaded that Jermaine O'Neal still couldn't get minutes in his 4th season.

So when a team's top 3-10 are vastly superior to the other team's and they match up extremely well, it's not really a surprise.

[97 bulls]

LMAO. Only on ISH would replacing a FAR worse player with a FAR better player (at that point in their careers especially) result in a WORSE outcome for a series. What a fukcing JOKE. :oldlol:
The point wasn't to imply that pippen is in any way shape or form better than the jordan. But the way they led was a total contrast. Pippen nurtured. Jordan ruled with an iron fist. Both can be effective as well as ineffective. In the case of the blazers, I feel they would've responded to pippen.


Sheed would fall in line, just like he did when Jordan played him 1-on-1 while Sheed was in college and punished him so much that Sheed was actually crying.
This is after one game. With wallace trying to make a name for himself. This further solidifies my point that wallace couldn't handle jordans mental bashing for a whole season much less one game.


And thats why you continually overrate Pippen. Because that exact same scenario would have occurred AT LEAST 80% of the time, because that's who Pippen WAS: a tremendous all around player, defender, and facilitator, but not worth much down the stretch of games offensively (and not aggressive down the stretch). Not a truly dominant, Batman-type of player. LMAO to suggest that if that game played out for the first 38 minutes exactly as it did 10 times, that the meltdown would have only happoened that ONE time. My ass. Try AT LEAST 8 times out of 10 if not EVERY time. Get real.
And what are you basing this on? It wasn't pippens job as a 34 year old to try to take over games while with the blazers. It was his job to get wallace the ball and let him try to work an old AC green. And as has already been pointed out, he avg 17 pts on 47% shooting as the 3rd option and led the blazers back from a deficit in game 5. So its obvious he was capable. It just wasn't meant to be in game 7

I'm not overrating pippen. I do believe jordan would've took that blazer team home. But I do beliieve they probably aren't even in that situation to begin with cuz I don't believe wallace (who was the blazers best player) would've been able to overcome jordans methods. You said yourself that jordan had wallace crying.

And this isn't to say pippen was a better leader than jordan. Just different. There are some players that I feel do play better with a leader that will light a fire under their ass like lamar odom. I don't see pippen bringing the most out of a player like that. But I believe jordan could've.

The fact is chemistry is just as important as talent when it comes to winning. Jordan brings more talent to that blazer team over pippen but I do believe his mentality would've killed that teams chemistry.

[andgar923]

It amazes me at how stupid some people are, and how some continue to be.

[97 bulls]

Like I said earlier in a post it was Pippen who led them back into that series in game 5. That's why that 4th quarter haunts him so much. In that game 5 he had 22pts 6rebs 3assist 6stls 4blks 4to's 8/12fg 2/4 3pt 4/7ft and that's with dislocating two fingers in the first quarter of the game that had to be reset.
Id love to see the pippen detractors respond to this. Nice post smoke

[zay_24]

The blazers wouldve been worse so no

[andgar923]

Id love to see the pippen detractors respond to this. Nice post smoke

It was also Pippen who managed to do nothing during their collapse.

[97 bulls]

And who says that the Blazers get that 15 point lead if the game is replayed 10 times? How many times do you expect them to hold Shaq to 9 points in the first 3 quarters?



Not really when you consider that the Blazers had more talent overall. The Lakers had the 2 best players in the series, but Portland was a stacked team and each of the Blazers starting 5 were better than the Lakers 3rd best player, and you can throw Brian Grant in there as well who was a good defender who had been really good the previous season in a bigger role and would average 15/9 the following season on Miami with more minutes. Wells and Schrempf could be dangerous given minutes and shots, particularly Wells, though due to the depth, that wasn't always the case. Even Greg Anthony was good for a back up point guard due to his defense and the fact that he hit 3s. The team was so loaded that Jermaine O'Neal still couldn't get minutes in his 4th season.

So when a team's top 3-10 are vastly superior to the other team's and they match up extremely well, it's not really a surprise.
Oh come off it. You act as if thhe blazers were the favorite to win that series. The lakers were the better team. And them overcomming that 15 pt deficit wasn't. What id call insurmountable. If I remember correct, it was due to 3 or 4 3 pts shots by ron harper and brian shaw that brought them back. And that was steve smith and damon damon stadoumires fault. But 12 quick points and the lakers were back in it.

its also sad how much you try to dominish rick fox, robert horry, brian shaw, ron harper, and mainly glen rice. Rice was every bit as good as steve smith from a talent standpoint. And had to be respected. And a couple of bad statistical games is not an indication of him being a bad player.

[97 bulls]

It was also Pippen who managed to do nothing during their collapse.
Ok. So what's the point? Damn the man is human. I've seen jordan cost his team games, I've seen magic, bird, whoever. Didn't kobe and the lakers give up a 25 pts lead to the celtics? I remember a game during the regular season in 98 in which the bulls were beating the jazz by 20 plus and the jazz came back and won. I remember a game the bulls played vs the lakers in which the shaq led lakers were up by 20+ points and pippen and kukoc and harper led the bulls back. In game 3 vs orlando in 96, weren't the magic up by 17 or so points before the bulls came back and finished them off?


Wasn't it pippen that led the bulls back from being down 17 pts in 92 vs portland in the nba finals game 6.

Why does scottie pippen only get labeled a loser for stuff every other great has done?

[andgar923]

Ok. So what's the point? Damn the man is human. I've seen jordan cost his team games, I've seen magic, bird, whoever. Didn't kobe and the lakers give up a 25 pts lead to the celtics? I remember a game during the regular season in 98 in which the bulls were beating the jazz by 20 plus and the jazz came back and won. I remember a game the bulls played vs the lakers in which the shaq led lakers were up by 20+ points and pippen and kukoc and harper led the bulls back. In game 3 vs orlando in 96, weren't the magic up by 17 or so points before the bulls came back and finished them off?


Wasn't it pippen that led the bulls back from being down 17 pts in 92 vs portland in the nba finals game 6.

Why does scottie pippen only get labeled a loser for stuff every other great has done?
:cry:

[97 bulls]

:cry:
Lol then just admit your biased and got a gay love thing for michael jordan. Instead of trying to poke holes in a players career.

What makes you different from your typical kobe sucker?

[ShaqAttack3234]

Oh come off it. You act as if thhe blazers were the favorite to win that series. The lakers were the better team. And them overcomming that 15 pt deficit wasn't. What id call insurmountable. If I remember correct, it was due to 3 or 4 3 pts shots by ron harper and brian shaw that brought them back. And that was steve smith and damon damon stadoumires fault. But 12 quick points and the lakers were back in it.

You have no idea what you're talking about once again.

The Blazers went into a slump after that late February game while LA went on a 19 game winning streak. But many did have the Blazers winning a title earlier in the season and they were widely considered the deepest and most talented team in the NBA. If you really want to argue that fact I can humiliate you very easily. It wouldn't have been a surprise if the Blazers had won the 2000 championship. That's for damn sure.

As far as the come back? Yeah, the role players did make some big plays, but Shaq and Kobe were the 2 biggest reasons for the comeback.


its also sad how much you try to dominish rick fox, robert horry, brian shaw, ron harper, and mainly glen rice. Rice was every bit as good as steve smith from a talent standpoint. And had to be respected. And a couple of bad statistical games is not an indication of him being a bad player.

It's sad how a punk like you even tries arguing with me.

Rick Fox wasn't much of a factor on the 2000 team. He did play well on the 2001 and 2002 teams, and I've given him credit for that.

Brian Shaw? Pretty good defender and would occasionally throw those lobs to Shaq. Hit some big shots in that game 7, but on a game to game basis? He was not an impact player, and every team has a handful of players who are better than him."

Horry? A role player and a good team defender, solid passer, pretty good rebounder and a decent shooting threat(even though he didn't shoot particularly well that season, at least on 3s). I like Horry as a role player, but he's not a guy who you can really use to prop up a cast.

I give Ron Harper credit. He was arguably their 3rd most important player, particularly in the playoffs. But that tells you how unimpressive that team was outside Shaq and Kobe. Harper was a good role player, but shouldn't be your 3rd most important player. He was a good defender, made smart passes and knew the offense, but he wasn't a good shooter or offensive threat.

Glen Rice? Do I really need to pull up all of those quotes from Phil about Glen that season?

Where should I start regarding Rice in his 30's post-elbow surgery on the Lakers?

Hmmm, got benched late in some games for being a defensive liability, was a poor fit in the offense and was also benched at times for standing around when he didn't have the ball and completely disappeared for almost the entire playoffs.

He was the one 3 point shooter on that team that you had to respect, but even he only made one three per game. And the Lakers were one of the worst 3 point shooting teams in the league.

Glen was so important that the Lakers didn't even make him an offer after the season. :rolleyes: Oh, and they missed him so much that they won 2 more titles without him.

The guy had declined A TON and was rapidly declining. Yet a clown like you is really going to claim he was as good as Steve Smith in 2000? :roll: :oldlol: :roll:

Get over it, the Lakers weren't that good outside of their duo. Do I need to show you the analysts praising Portland's depth and calling LA a 2 man team again?

Yes, they had a few solid role players, but 2 consistent scoring options. I might be able to call Rice one if not for the playoffs and his fast decline/poor fit in the offense.

I got news for you, role players like that aren't hard to find. Portland had a ton of different scoring options and almost always had a guy capable of exploiting a different mismatch.

Rice was an averaging starting small forward by 2000, nothing more. An average player who was a bad fit in the offense, and whose primary value to that particular team(being a capable 3 point shooter), is something every team has. How can you really hype that?

[kizut1659]

You have no idea what you're talking about once again.

The Blazers went into a slump after that late February game while LA went on a 19 game winning streak. But many did have the Blazers winning a title earlier in the season and they were widely considered the deepest and most talented team in the NBA. If you really want to argue that fact I can humiliate you very easily. It wouldn't have been a surprise if the Blazers had won the 2000 championship. That's for damn sure.

As far as the come back? Yeah, the role players did make some big plays, but Shaq and Kobe were the 2 biggest reasons for the comeback.



It's sad how a punk like you even tries arguing with me.

Rick Fox wasn't much of a factor on the 2000 team. He did play well on the 2001 and 2002 teams, and I've given him credit for that.

Brian Shaw? Pretty good defender and would occasionally throw those lobs to Shaq. Hit some big shots in that game 7, but on a game to game basis? He was not an impact player, and every team has a handful of players who are better than him."

Horry? A role player and a good team defender, solid passer, pretty good rebounder and a decent shooting threat(even though he didn't shoot particularly well that season, at least on 3s). I like Horry as a role player, but he's not a guy who you can really use to prop up a cast.

I give Ron Harper credit. He was arguably their 3rd most important player, particularly in the playoffs. But that tells you how unimpressive that team was outside Shaq and Kobe. Harper was a good role player, but shouldn't be your 3rd most important player. He was a good defender, made smart passes and knew the offense, but he wasn't a good shooter or offensive threat.

Glen Rice? Do I really need to pull up all of those quotes from Phil about Glen that season?

Where should I start regarding Rice in his 30's post-elbow surgery on the Lakers?

Hmmm, got benched late in some games for being a defensive liability, was a poor fit in the offense and was also benched at times for standing around when he didn't have the ball and completely disappeared for almost the entire playoffs.

He was the one 3 point shooter on that team that you had to respect, but even he only made one three per game. And the Lakers were one of the worst 3 point shooting teams in the league.

Glen was so important that the Lakers didn't even make him an offer after the season. :rolleyes: Oh, and they missed him so much that they won 2 more titles without him.

The guy had declined A TON and was rapidly declining. Yet a clown like you is really going to claim he was as good as Steve Smith in 2000? :roll: :oldlol: :roll:

Get over it, the Lakers weren't that good outside of their duo. Do I need to show you the analysts praising Portland's depth and calling LA a 2 man team again?

Yes, they had a few solid role players, but 2 consistent scoring options. I might be able to call Rice one if not for the playoffs and his fast decline/poor fit in the offense.

I got news for you, role players like that aren't hard to find. Portland had a ton of different scoring options and almost always had a guy capable of exploiting a different mismatch.

Rice was an averaging starting small forward by 2000, nothing more. An average player who was a bad fit in the offense, and whose primary value to that particular team(being a capable 3 point shooter), is something every team has. How can you really hype that?


You are right basically but Shaw and Harper in my opinion were still the biggest reasons the Lakers won game 7. Shaq and Kobe both looked demoralized at the beginning of the 4th quarter and it were Shaw's and Harper's 3s that started the comeback -which was THEN finished by Shaq and Kobe. So even though the Lakers' supporting cast was pretty average or even weak, the biggest reason Lakers won game 7 was because the supporting cast overachieved at the right moment. This stuff just happens sometimes. . . such as for example Steve Kerr's game 6 against Dallas in 2003.

[Soundwave]

97bulls --

Pippen isn't as good as Jordan.

That's not a knock on Pippen.

Even Scottie himself would be the first to admit he's not as good as Jordan.

Get over it already.

[97 bulls]

You have no idea what you're talking about once again.

The Blazers went into a slump after that late February game while LA went on a 19 game winning streak. But many did have the Blazers winning a title earlier in the season and they were widely considered the deepest and most talented team in the NBA. If you really want to argue that fact I can humiliate you very easily. It wouldn't have been a surprise if the Blazers had won the 2000 championship. That's for damn sure.

As far as the come back? Yeah, the role players did make some big plays, but Shaq and Kobe were the 2 biggest reasons for the comeback.



It's sad how a punk like you even tries arguing with me.

Rick Fox wasn't much of a factor on the 2000 team. He did play well on the 2001 and 2002 teams, and I've given him credit for that.

Brian Shaw? Pretty good defender and would occasionally throw those lobs to Shaq. Hit some big shots in that game 7, but on a game to game basis? He was not an impact player, and every team has a handful of players who are better than him."

Horry? A role player and a good team defender, solid passer, pretty good rebounder and a decent shooting threat(even though he didn't shoot particularly well that season, at least on 3s). I like Horry as a role player, but he's not a guy who you can really use to prop up a cast.

I give Ron Harper credit. He was arguably their 3rd most important player, particularly in the playoffs. But that tells you how unimpressive that team was outside Shaq and Kobe. Harper was a good role player, but shouldn't be your 3rd most important player. He was a good defender, made smart passes and knew the offense, but he wasn't a good shooter or offensive threat.

Glen Rice? Do I really need to pull up all of those quotes from Phil about Glen that season?

Where should I start regarding Rice in his 30's post-elbow surgery on the Lakers?

Hmmm, got benched late in some games for being a defensive liability, was a poor fit in the offense and was also benched at times for standing around when he didn't have the ball and completely disappeared for almost the entire playoffs.

He was the one 3 point shooter on that team that you had to respect, but even he only made one three per game. And the Lakers were one of the worst 3 point shooting teams in the league.

Glen was so important that the Lakers didn't even make him an offer after the season. :rolleyes: Oh, and they missed him so much that they won 2 more titles without him.

The guy had declined A TON and was rapidly declining. Yet a clown like you is really going to claim he was as good as Steve Smith in 2000? :roll: :oldlol: :roll:

Get over it, the Lakers weren't that good outside of their duo. Do I need to show you the analysts praising Portland's depth and calling LA a 2 man team again?

Yes, they had a few solid role players, but 2 consistent scoring options. I might be able to call Rice one if not for the playoffs and his fast decline/poor fit in the offense.

I got news for you, role players like that aren't hard to find. Portland had a ton of different scoring options and almost always had a guy capable of exploiting a different mismatch.

Rice was an averaging starting small forward by 2000, nothing more. An average player who was a bad fit in the offense, and whose primary value to that particular team(being a capable 3 point shooter), is something every team has. How can you really hype that?
Rice avg 16 ppg in a little over 30 minutes in 99. You don't need to rehash the feud he had with phil jackson. Rice didn't like his role in the offense. He was relegated to being what was essentially a 3pt shooter. And he made it known he didn't like his role. And his moving on was a mutual break up. But he had a reputation for being a great scorer. And that reputation helped the lakers cuz teams didn't like to leave him. Which is why shaw and harper and horry were able to hit such big shots.

Id tend to agree with you as far as your break down on the rest of the team. But they were solid. They weren't 20 pt scorers, but with shaq and kobe, they didn't need to be. But they were great at doing what they were brought in to do. Play defense and hit open shots.

But as much as you want to disparage the lakers team, they were the favorite to win that series vs portland, and they had homecourt advantage. Winning 67 games. Portland had the depth, but the lakers were the better team.

[97 bulls]

97bulls --

Pippen isn't as good as Jordan.

That's not a knock on Pippen.

Even Scottie himself would be the first to admit he's not as good as Jordan.

Get over it already.
I never said he was. Maybe you should go back and reread my posts. I don't make threads trying prop pippen. But I sure aas hell am gonna set you guys straight when you start a bunch of nonsense.

[Da_Realist]

It's certainly legitimate to believe MJ would have killed Portland's chemistry with his heavy handed leadership on such a frail, quick-tempered and thin-skinned bunch of cry baby teammates but I think he would have made it work. Here's why...

1) Throughout his career, a team was never worse after MJ joined the team. Even those dreadful 19 win Wizards he joined at 50 years old after missing 6 years and playing through career threatening knee problems.

2) He loves a challenge...and the 2000 Lakers were as big as any. Shaq was the best player in the league, MJ Jr was coming into his prime and they were led by Phil Jackson himself. Nothing would have stroked MJ's competitive juices more than having the possibility of knocking off the Lakers.

3) He couldn't win without Pippen? Nobody was dumb enough to say that when he was in his prime but at age 36 there would have been some people throwing rocks at the throne. There would have been whispers about whether MJ could do it without Pippen and Phil Jackson. Yet another mental challenge he would have loved to overcome.

4) What better way to stick it to Jerry Krause and Jerry Reinsdorf than to win a title in Portland?

5) MJ Jr. The ultimate personal challenge. With the world watching. How could he get his team to win when the other team has a player so determined to replace him?

6) He's a winner. The Lakers were the golden team at that point. Portland had just enough talent to upset them and the world would have wanted to see if MJ could pull off one last miracle to end his career. He would have made it work.

Portland might have won or they might not have (you guys are forgetting that the Lakers would have been more focused with MJ on the other team and would have played better with fewer mental lapses)...but the bottom line is MJ wouldn't have fallen asleep at the wheel with a legitimate chance to win a title and answer so many questions to put a final bow on his career.

[Harison]

IMO even 40 yrs Jordan (healthy) instead of Pippen would had won with those Blazers.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Rice avg 16 ppg in a little over 30 minutes in 99. You don't need to rehash the feud he had with phil jackson. Rice didn't like his role in the offense. He was relegated to being what was essentially a 3pt shooter. And he made it known he didn't like his role. And his moving on was a mutual break up. But he had a reputation for being a great scorer. And that reputation helped the lakers cuz teams didn't like to leave him. Which is why shaw and harper and horry were able to hit such big shots.

I acknowledged that teams didn't want to leave him because he could obviously still hit open 3s, but how many good teams literally don't have at least one 3 point shooter who you didn't want to leave open?

My problem with Glen is that he didn't accept his role. That's always a problem when a role player won't accept his role. And at that stage of his career, Glen clearly should've been a role player. Certainly, 12/4/2, 41 FG% for the playoffs(and significantly worse after the 1st round) along with poor defense while being a poor fit and complaining about it makes my criticisms valid.


Id tend to agree with you as far as your break down on the rest of the team. But they were solid. They weren't 20 pt scorers, but with shaq and kobe, they didn't need to be. But they were great at doing what they were brought in to do. Play defense and hit open shots.

If you agree with my opinions of their games then don't accuse me of trying to diminish them. That really doesn't make sense if you agree with my assessments of those players. I do agree that most of them played defense and passed well, or at least Harper, Horry and Shaw.

As far as hit open shots? In general, that was a problem because 2 of their starters were guys who couldn't hit open shots consistently enough to make their man think twice about doubling Shaq or helping out on Kobe when he beat his man off the dribble. Granted, Harper brought positives to that team, but that was a flaw. Green was pretty much there for experience by that point.


But as much as you want to disparage the lakers team, they were the favorite to win that series vs portland, and they had homecourt advantage. Winning 67 games. Portland had the depth, but the lakers were the better team.

The Lakers winning 67 games is still a surprise to me, especially since they could've went for 69-13 if they wanted to. But it's one of the reasons why I can't believe Phil didn't win coach of the year.

The team starts off without Kobe for a month and ultimately goes 12-4 without him with one of the losses being a game that Shaq was suspended in. Which is not something you'd expect considering how many flaws they have on paper without Kobe and then there was no adjustment period when Kobe did return which is amazing for a team that had good chemistry and momentum. Then you consider that they had to learn the triangle offense, which they got better in as the season progressed and you consider all of that and 67 wins seems unlikely. They weren't a surprise championship team, they were always considered one of the teams with the best shot, but I expected more 55, maybe 60 wins at the most. And in hindsight, analyzing the season, I'd still say that's what seems more likely. It was talked about quite a bit that the Lakers had less talent than previous seasons.

I can't argue with them being the better team because they beat Portland, but Portland was more talented.

My word may not mean much, but I just had to look on the first page of a google news archive search to come up with these.


The Blazers have been almost universally stamped as the best, the deepest and the most talented team in the league. - 10/31/99 St. Petersburg Times


The Trail Blazers are so good that Denver Nuggets veteran George McCloud said, "Their second team could make the playoffs." San Antonio Spurs Coach Gregg Popovich calls the Trail Blazers "the most talented team in the league," and Cleveland's Shawn Kemp added, "That team should be illegal." - 2/18/00 Washington Post


We all know what the Portland Trail Blazers are. They went out and assembled one of the most talented, deepest, experienced teams ever put together and

The Portland Trail Blazers also have a 6-1 record but they bring much more than that to the Miami Arena. As Alonzo Mourning put it Monday: ``Across the board, they're probably the most talented team in the league.'' - 11/16/99 Palm Beach Post


They're called the most talented team in the league. The one that spent all that money. The one favored to win the NBA title. 11/6/99 Press-Telegram

[AlphaWolf24]

IMO even 40 yrs Jordan (healthy) instead of Pippen would had won with those Blazers.


:applause: :applause: :applause: Jordan stans proving how stupid of a fanbase they are......

one post at a time...