2001 Lakers vs 1996 Bulls

[TheReal Kendall]

Who wins?

Me and my cousin was thinking bout this last night while watching the Bulls vs Blazers game.

We were discussing the 91-92 Bulls at first but I feel like you gotta have both teams at their best so I chose the 96 Bulls.

I started to pick the 03-04 Lakers but they didn't win anything.

We both was leaning more towards the Lakers cause of Shaq and they had some pretty good role players but I'm not really sure.

You really can't beat against MJ.

Bolded are the Key players

Lakers roster:

Kobe Bryant
Derek Fisher
Greg Foster
Rick Fox
Devean George
Horace Grant
Ron Harper
Robert Horry
Tyronn Lue
Mark Madsen
Slava Medvedenko
Shaquille O'Neal
Mike Penberthy
Isaiah Rider
Brian Shaw

VS

Bulls:

Randy Brown
Jud Buechler
Jason Caffey
James Edwards
Jack Haley
Ron Harper
Michael Jordan
Steve Kerr
Toni Kukoč
Luc Longley
Scottie Pippen
Dennis Rodman
John Salley
Dickey Simpkins
Bill Wennington

Who you got? And Why?



So if this has been done before.:cheers:

[3peated]

lakers because you can't stop 2001 shaq

[Dengness9]

Ill take Scottie and Mike over Kobe and Shaq any day or year.

Bulls Ron Harper was much better than Lakers Ron Harper

Dennis Rodman was much better than Lakers Horace Grant

Horry was a hell of a player but Toni Kukoc washes that out. Horry one of the most clutch players in the playoffs all time but Kukoc was 13/4/4 that year while Horry averaged 5 and 4 that season. Kukoc was a truly more skilled player.

Steve Kerr and DFish is tricky. Not to discredit all Fisher did for the Lakers but Steve Kerr has the highest 3pt percentage of all time.

[kshutts1]

Not entirely sure on this answer...

Harper vs Fisher
MJ vs Kobe
Pippen vs Fox
Rodman vs Grant
Longley vs Shaq

Kerr, Kukoc, Salley, Wennington (like his ability to stretch floor from C) vs Shaw, George, Horry, Slava (?)

With the exception of the Longley/Shaq matchup, the Bulls are significantly better defensively. In fact, Fox, while a solid player, was mediocre enough that Pippen could roam like crazy, particularly since the Lakers were not an elite 3p shooting team.

On one hand I want to say "no one could stop 2001 Shaq", but on the other hand, Bulls are just so well built, work well together, etc. This is going 7, and in game 7 I'm taking Jordan.

[TheReal Kendall]

See I can't make up my mind either.

I know it will go to 7 games.

I don't see the Bulls stopping Shaq.

I think Horry can contain Kukoc and I know this might sound crazy but I think Kobe would be able to hold MJ to decent numbers.

I'm leaning towards the Lakers only because of Shaq. I think the Bulls Bigs would all be in foul trouble.

I just don't know:confusedshrug:

[ispin69]

Huge Shaq fan but I'm going with the Bulls cause MJ/Pippen/Kukoc/Rodman were unstoppable. Young chuckbe was a weak spot even Big Shot Bob Robert Horry couldn't save Chuckbe. Also look at the defense. MJ/Pippen/Rodman...all huge lock down guys. Where's the Lakers defense other than Shaq controlling the paint? He would get in foul trouble quick.

[TheReal Kendall]

Huge Shaq fan but I'm going with the Bulls cause MJ/Pippen/Kukoc/Rodman were unstoppable. Young chuckbe was a weak spot even Big Shot Bob Robert Horry couldn't save Chuckbe. Also look at the defense. MJ/Pippen/Rodman...all huge lock down guys. Where's the Lakers defense other than Shaq controlling the paint? He would get in foul trouble quick.

Yeah but neither of those guys can guard Shaq.

it's a toss up for me.

Might come down to the last play of the game

[Young X]

Bulls.

[305Baller]

Never bet against Jordan. He will try to take your virginity.

[zoom17]

Never bet against Jordan. He will try to take your virginity.
:roll: :roll:

[Dengness9]

Yeah but neither of those guys can guard Shaq.

it's a toss up for me.

Might come down to the last play of the game


Don't know why you think Kobe could check MJ, he would shit on him. And Kobe has to worry about one of two dobermans guarding him in MJ or Pip.


Hack a Shaq all day for Bulls w/ all the big men on that roster.

[Magic 32]

Phil knows...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO8B34V7ufk&t=5m2s

[Dengness9]

Phil knows...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO8B34V7ufk&t=5m2s


I already knew what interview this was when you posted the link.

Typical beat around the bush answer. He never gave a an answer tbh. Not to mention he definitely wasn't gonna say the Bulls while he was the current coach of LA.

But thanks for the link! Good interview.

[97 bulls]

The 01 Lakers are the 96 Magic without the depth. Nick Anderson, Dennis Scott, Horace Grant, a young Brian Shaw, and Donald Royal are 10 times better than Rick Fox, old ass Brian Shaw, old ass Horace Grant, Robert Horry, and Derrick Fisher.


The Bulls killed the Magic and would kill the Lakers

[9erempiree]

I will take 2001 Lakers who were primed. The best playoff team ever.

The Lakers already blew out the 3peat Bulls at the Forum and that's with a young inexperienced team. A Lakers team in their prime would smoke the Bulls.

[97 bulls]

Phil knows...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO8B34V7ufk&t=5m2s
Jackson basically said the Bulls would win but it would be difficult. He alluded to them beating the Magic in a sweep. Which was basically the same team.

What I found more interesting is how he calls that Bulls "we". As if hed be against the Lakers even though he was the Lakers current coach.

[TheReal Kendall]

Jackson basically said the Bulls would win but it would be difficult. He alluded to them beating the Magic in a sweep. Which was basically the same team.

What I found more interesting is how he calls that Bulls "we". As if hed be against the Lakers even though he was the Lakers current coach.

That is kinda weird

[Noyze]

Wow, this is a great comparison. Jordan actually didn't have a great finals in 96. And even though he was the best player in the league he wasn't in his prime. Pippen was better 96-98 then he was 91-93 though.

Here's the problem....




Shaq.

He was so incredibly dominant at this time that even the defense of this great Bulls team wouldn't even slow him down. I really love the Bulls and grew up watching them but they'd need alittle more to beat the 01 Lakers. Maaaaaaaybe they could get the 2000 Lakers since Kobe was just a role player and not an elite star yet.

This is assuming both teams have Phil of course.

[GrapeApe]

The Bulls defense was downright nasty that year and their quickness/rotations would give Shaq some trouble, or frustrate him at the very least. Jordan and Pippen would constantly harass young Kobe and force plenty of turnovers and difficult shots. It wouldn't be a cakewalk, but I think the Bulls take it in 6.

[9erempiree]

The Bulls defense was downright nasty that year and their quickness/rotations would give Shaq some trouble, or frustrate him at the very least. Jordan and Pippen would constantly harass young Kobe and force plenty of turnovers and difficult shots. It wouldn't be a cakewalk, but I think the Bulls take it in 6.

Are you forgetting the massacre at the Forum when the Lakers blew out the 3peat Bulls?

Kobe was giving MJ and Pip fits. This was a teenage Kobe too.

[9erempiree]

http://s14.postimg.org/mkfte2os1/Forum.png

[Twiens]

One loss all playoffs for that Laker team, I'd take them in 6.

[Twiens]

The 01 Lakers are the 96 Magic without the depth. Nick Anderson, Dennis Scott, Horace Grant, a young Brian Shaw, and Donald Royal are 10 times better than Rick Fox, old ass Brian Shaw, old ass Horace Grant, Robert Horry, and Derrick Fisher.


The Bulls killed the Magic and would kill the Lakers

Kobe>Penny and Prime Shaq >>>> Young Shaq

[dawsey6]

Are you forgetting the massacre at the Forum when the Lakers blew out the 3peat Bulls?

Kobe was giving MJ and Pip fits. This was a teenage Kobe too.

Ah yes, I certainly remember that regular season game vs. the 1998 Bulls. What is your point?

[9erempiree]

Ah yes, I certainly remember that regular season game vs. the 1998 Bulls. What is your point?

A prime Lakers 3peat team will beat the 96 Bulls.

Not the smartest eh?

[TheReal Kendall]

A prime Lakers 3peat team will beat the 96 Bulls.

Not the smartest eh?

Do you really believe the shit that come out your mouth?

[9erempiree]

Do you really believe the shit that come out your mouth?

You were probably 2 years of age when it happened. Yes, they would beat the Bulls. The Lakers were the most dominant team in history only losing one game in the playoffs and that was after a two week lay off.

[Fresh Kid]

Whats Real Men Wear green's problem? I created a thread for mr, jabbar vs silkk the shocker debate about basketball discussions and it got deleted. whats up with dat?:biggums:

[Soundwave]

I don't think Shaq was *that* much more dominant in 2001 over 1996, his game was still basically exactly the same.

[TheReal Kendall]

You were probably 2 years of age when it happened. Yes, they would beat the Bulls. The Lakers were the most dominant team in history only losing one game in the playoffs and that was after a two week lay off.

I'm probably older than you.

So what they beat the Bulls in a regular season game.

Bulls still went on to win the Championship that year.

Lakers couldn't even beat the Jazz that year so the what does that mean?

98 WCF Jazz 4-0. Lakers got swept.

They lost when it matter the most.

You say the Lakers are the most dominant team in history but that was only because Shaq.

Kobe was just a another role player/sidekick



Whats Real Men Wear green's problem? I created a thread for mr, jabbar vs silkk the shocker debate about basketball discussions and it got deleted. whats up with dat?:biggums:


Stop trolling

[dawsey6]

A prime Lakers 3peat team will beat the 96 Bulls.

Not the smartest eh?

Apparently you're not. Otherwise you'd recognize a rhetorical question. :applause:

Yes, Chicago in 1998 suffered considerable losses to inferior teams... during the regular season... in 1998. That year offered a different set of challenges for them than the 1996 Bulls, which makes your point regarding the beatdown at the forum irrelavent. We're going on the 1996 team. Maybe we should also discuss the absolute greatness of the 1998 Lakers playoff run while we're grasping at rosters that have nothing to do with the discussion. :lol

[9erempiree]

Apparently you're not. Otherwise you'd recognize a rhetorical question. :applause:

Yes, Chicago in 1998 suffered considerable losses to inferior teams... during the regular season... in 1998. That year offered a different set of challenges for them than the 1996 Bulls, which makes your point regarding the beatdown at the forum irrelavent. We're going on the 1996 team. Maybe we should also discuss the absolute greatness of the 1998 Lakers playoff run while we're grasping at rosters that have nothing to do with the discussion. :lol

My argument is if an inexperience young Lakers team whom lay the wood on the 3peat Bulls, there is no reason why the most dominant team in the post season, losing only one game and blowing out teams, would not beat an aging Bulls team. You can say it's 96 not 98 but if you make them 2 years younger....versus a Lakers team in their prime, whom dominated the playoffs, they will beat them still.

Make one team 2 years younger and make the other team in their prime. I got with the prime team.

[TheMan]

Kobe>Penny and Prime Shaq >>>> Young Shaq
No way Kobe in 2001 was better than 96 Penny and Shaq in 96 wasn't that much off prime Shaq. The biggest difference? Shaq in 2001 had PJax while he had Brian Hill in 96.

96 Penny > 01 Kobe
01 Shaq > 96 Shaq

[TheReal Kendall]

My argument is if an inexperience young Lakers team whom lay the wood on the 3peat Bulls, there is no reason why the most dominant team in the post season, losing only one game and blowing out teams, would not beat an aging Bulls team. You can say it's 96 not 98 but if you make them 2 years younger....versus a Lakers team in their prime, whom dominated the playoffs, they will beat them still.

Make one team 2 years younger and make the other team in their prime. I got with the prime team.

Lakers got swept by the Jazz that year also in the WCF.

Bulls beat Jazz 4-2 in the 98 finals.

So Jazz greater than Lakers. Lakers couldn't win when it mattered most

[97 bulls]

My argument is if an inexperience young Lakers team whom lay the wood on the 3peat Bulls, there is no reason why the most dominant team in the post season, losing only one game and blowing out teams, would not beat an aging Bulls team. You can say it's 96 not 98 but if you make them 2 years younger....versus a Lakers team in their prime, whom dominated the playoffs, they will beat them still.

Make one team 2 years younger and make the other team in their prime. I got with the prime team.
Most Laker fans feel those late 90s Lakers squads were much better than the threepeat one.

And your putting way too much stock in one game. From 96-98 the Bulls were 4-2 vs the Lakers.

[Doranku]

Most Laker fans feel those late 90s Lakers squads were much better than the threepeat one.

And your putting way too much stock in one game. From 96-98 the Bulls were 4-2 vs the Lakers.
:wtf: :wtf: :wtf:

[scandisk_]

I will take 2001 Lakers who were primed. The best playoff team ever.

The Lakers already blew out the 3peat Bulls at the Forum and that's with a young inexperienced team. A Lakers team in their prime would smoke the Bulls.

Yeah, I definitely remember that 4 airballs against the Jazz. Could've been 5 against the Bulls in the Finals. :lol

[poido123]

I have no idea, I think it would be a draw lol or come down to 1 possession in a game 7, with a game winner from either team...

[9erempiree]

Most Laker fans feel those late 90s Lakers squads were much better than the threepeat one.

And your putting way too much stock in one game. From 96-98 the Bulls were 4-2 vs the Lakers.

You're lying. No Laker fans will say that unless for nostalgia.

The proof is their dominance. They lost game 1 of the Finals because they had a 2 week layoff.

There were stories about some of the players taking vacations. I believed Fox and Kobe went on vacation and came back. Shaq too. That's how good they were and they knew it.

[9erempiree]

Yeah, I definitely remember that 4 airballs against the Jazz. Could've been 5 against the Bulls in the Finals. :lol

We're talking about the 3peat Lakers here. Like I said, those 4 airballs, lay the wood on the 3peat Bulls and you are willing to bet against the 2001 Lakers team?

It will be a sweep or Lakers still win 4-1

:facepalm

[9erempiree]

2001 Lakers:


Annihilated a top-seeded, 58-win San Antonio team in four games in the conference finals, winning the final two games by 39 points and 29 points, respectively, to complete an unbeaten run through three 50-win teams in the West playoff bracket.


Their demolition of the Spurs, in particular, was impressive -- by my metric, it was the highest-scoring conference finals round since 1967. Better yet, the Lakers won their final eight games of the regular season as well. So, after starting off a ho-hum 48-26, they finished on a 23-1 blitz.

I remember this year. They were predicted to win again but they didn't care about the regular season. This was the beginning of Kobe and Shaq feuding. Can you imagine if they put their differences aside.

Greatest team in history.

[sekachu]

96 bulls win in 6

01 kobe was not already to challenge 96MJ mentally. Too much skills for kobe to handle, MJ defensive would bascially shit on him and inexperience disadvantage.

Nobody could contain shaq in one on one but 96 bulls was one of the best help defensive rotation team when you have MJ and Pippen. Plus, luc longley, bill wennington, john salley, jame edward will hack the shit on him literally since shaq was a 50% ft at best.

[9erempiree]

96 bulls win in 6

01 kobe was not already to challenge 96MJ mentally. Too much skills for kobe to handle, MJ defensive would bascially shit on him and inexperience disadvantage.

Nobody could contain shaq in one on one but 96 bulls was one of the best help defensive rotation team when you have MJ and Pippen. Plus, luc longley, bill wennington, john salley, jame edward will hack the shit on him literally since shaq was a 50% ft at best.

Heck, we've seen what teenage Kobe did to MJ and suddenly a more refine version can't play against MJ?

:facepalm

[TheReal Kendall]

Heck, we've seen what teenage Kobe did to MJ and suddenly a more refine version can't play against MJ?

:facepalm

Why you ignoring my post?

Stop talking bs bro

[97 bulls]

You're lying. No Laker fans will say that unless for nostalgia.

The proof is their dominance. They lost game 1 of the Finals because they had a 2 week layoff.

There were stories about some of the players taking vacations. I believed Fox and Kobe went on vacation and came back. Shaq too. That's how good they were and they knew it.
No. Youre obviously too young to remember. When the Lakers had Nick VanExel, Elden Cambell, Eddie Jones, everyone believed that team was more talented than the threepeat team. Hell they had four All-Stars in 97.

But they blamed Dell Harris for that Jazz debacle. Even nicknaming him "Dumb Del". If I had a nickel for every time I heard a Laker fan think about what might havd been for that squad.

[9erempiree]

No. Youre obviously too young to remember. When the Lakers had Nick VanExel, Elden Cambell, Eddie Jones, everyone believed that team was more talented than the threepeat team. Hell they had four All-Stars in 97.

No. You are delusional.


But they blamed Dell Harris for that Jazz debacle. Even nicknaming him "Dumb Del". If I had a nickel for every time I heard a Laker fan think about what might havd been for that squad.

I agree with this.

[RRR3]

No. You are delusional.



I agree with this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH6ERLyiVXw


:lol

[kNicKz]

I would never bet against the 1996 Bulls in any scenario

Jordan simply can't be stopped

[havoc33]

lakers because you can't stop 2001 shaq
Which is ludicrous. Shaq had a better season and playoffs in 2000, and then the Blazers came oh so close to knocking them out (Pippen played a huge part, playing free safety defense, taking the Lakers out of their game). People act like Shaq was completely unstoppable back then, but he was not. The Spurs, Kings and Blazers all had games were they severely limited Shaq's effectiveness and got him in foul trouble.

In 2001 the Lakers steamrolled through the Playoffs due to the whole team clicking on all cylinders, and Kobe playing out of his mind during the WCSF and WCF. And again in 2002, the Lakers were super close to getting outed by the Kings.

Now, Pippen, MJ and Rodman is three of the best defensive players of alltime, so needless to say they'd give the Lakers fits. Both the '92 Bulls and '96 Bulls would stand a fair chance against the '01 Lakers for sure.