Why do the 96-97 Rockets get a pass?

[TheMarkMadsen]

A team with 2 top 15 players of all time, not to mention Clyde Drexler, Kevin Wills & Mario Elie missing the finals?

Hakeem was one year removed from b2b FMVPS, Barkely was coming off a 23 & 12 year in Phoenix..

Barkley's playoff stats: 18 & 12 on 43%

Hakeems playoff stats: 23 & 11 on 59%

Drexler playoff stats: 18 6 & 5 on 44%

they lost in the WCF to the Jazz with Hakeem putting up 27ppg on 59% shooting, while Barkley's production dipped to 16 & 11 on 43% shooting.

Barkley had enough help to make the finals and potentially win..

what happened?

[jzek]

Because it's Jordan's league again and everyone gets a pass.

Hakeem was so lucky Jordan retired TBH. He would have suffered the same fate as Barkley, Ewing, Malone, Reggie, etc.

[millwad]

Because it's Jordan's league again and everyone gets a pass.

Hakeem was so lucky Jordan retired TBH. He would have suffered the same fate as Barkley, Ewing, Malone, Reggie, etc.

Hakeem had a winning record against Jordan, educate yourself.

[Legends66NBA7]

They don't get a pass, at all. Neither does the Hakeem/Barkley/Pippen experiment, even though that team was a little older.

Plus, the final nail to that team was a big time shot by John Stockton.

[millwad]

A team with 2 top 15 players of all time, not to mention Clyde Drexler, Kevin Wills & Mario Elie missing the finals?

Hakeem was one year removed from b2b FMVPS, Barkely was coming off a 23 & 12 year in Phoenix..

Barkley's playoff stats: 18 & 12 on 43%

Hakeems playoff stats: 23 & 11 on 59%

Drexler playoff stats: 18 6 & 5 on 44%

they lost in the WCF to the Jazz with Hakeem putting up 27ppg on 59% shooting, while Barkley's production dipped to 16 & 11 on 43% shooting.

Barkley had enough help to make the finals and potentially win..

what happened?

Matt Maloney happened, the worst point guard of all-time and Barkley wasn't healthy. Age was a factor as well, Olajuwon and Drexler were 34 years old.

[HomieWeMajor]

Charles Barkley is the most 'skilled' Power Forward EVER and if any of you say a bad word against him there will be a paragraph of bold text heading your way !

[Marchesk]

Charles Barkley is the most 'skilled' Power Forward EVER and if any of you say a bad word against him there will be a paragraph of bold text heading your way !

One wall of text is all you got? Weak sauce.

[Poetry]

Matt Maloney happened.

Glad to see people around here actually remember :lol

[SilkkTheShocker]

Sedale Theratt was absolutely carved up by Stockton at the end of game 6.

[TheMarkMadsen]

If TD, KG & Paul Pierce join forces at 33 & 34 YO are we talking a championnship?

[Legends66NBA7]

If TD, KG & Paul Pierce join forces at 33 & 34 YO are we talking a championnship?

Definitely.

That's like... one of the best front court combinations, maybe ever ? Off course, it depends on how they handle the 82 game regular season stretch and all 3 players are healthy. Plus, in the playoff neither of the 3 getting banged up even more.

Chemistry shouldn't be a problem with this team, both Duncan and Garnett are pretty unselfish, me-first type players. Pierce also has no problem in dividing his offensive load.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Pierce is close to done IMO. He looked really slow out there last year

[fpliii]

Pierce is close to done IMO. He looked really slow out there last year

Agreed, I think he'll be best served as a spot up shooter in limited minutes off the bench.

[sportjames23]

Hakeem had a winning record against Jordan, educate yourself.


What's that got to do with this? Regular season records don't mean shit in the playoffs.

[Poetry]

Sedale Theratt was absolutely carved up by Stockton at the end of game 6.

I have a lot of fond memories of basketball during the 90s and Stock's performance in the 4th is still one of the most memorable for me (he was great the entire series).

He came alive for something like 11 points down the stretch and absolutely willed them to win.

I hated seeing Barkley lose that game, but i liked Stock just as much. It's a bittersweet memory for me.

[fpliii]

Their key players were too old, and they went up against a great team in the Jazz.

Too bad we never got to see a Hakeem/Jordan matchup in the Finals. During the first threepeat especially, could've been interesting. Definitely would've been fun to watch.

[diamenz]

I have a lot of fond memories of basketball during the 90s and Stock's performance in the 4th is still one of the most memorable for me (he was great the entire series).

He came alive for something like 11 points down the stretch and absolutely willed them to win.

I hated seeing Barkley lose that game, but i liked Stock just as much. It's a bittersweet memory for me.

stockton was really underrated as scorer. if the jazz were down or just simply staying in the game, he would orchestrate the offense and at times you would think he didn't want to shoot the ball. when utah was down though, he would start taking shots (even pull up threes) and a lot of times he'd go on crazy runs.

[SilkkTheShocker]

I have a lot of fond memories of basketball during the 90s and Stock's performance in the 4th is still one of the most memorable for me (he was great the entire series).

He came alive for something like 11 points down the stretch and absolutely willed them to win.

I hated seeing Barkley lose that game, but i liked Stock just as much. It's a bittersweet memory for me.

Still remember watching the game also. Didn't really care who won, but had to give props to Stockton for that clutch play

[97 bulls]

There were alot of great teams that year as well. Plenty of depth. The most teams with 50+ wins ever in a season.

[CelticBaller]

If TD, KG & Paul Pierce join forces at 33 & 34 YO are we talking a championnship?
Yes

[millwad]

What's that got to do with this? Regular season records don't mean shit in the playoffs.

It doesn't say a whole lot but it's definitely an indication that the Rockets featuring Hakeem had their ways with the Bulls and that they were a bad match-up.

I like how everybody just dismiss the possibility that the Rockets could have beaten MJ when the Rockets beat basically beat all the teams from the Western Conference that MJ faced in the finals.

[fpliii]

It doesn't say a whole lot but it's definitely an indication that the Rockets featuring Hakeem had their ways with the Bulls and that they were a bad match-up.

I like how everybody just dismiss the possibility that the Rockets could have beaten MJ when the Rockets beat basically beat all the teams from the Western Conference that MJ faced in the finals.

:applause:

This is some of the most irritating shit on here. I'm going to bump that 93 Hakeem hypotheticals thread.

[millwad]

:applause:

This is some of the most irritating shit on here. I'm going to bump that 93 Hakeem hypotheticals thread.

It's just stupid and it doesn't make any sense at all.

Like in '93 the Bulls defeated the Phoenix Suns in 6 games in the finals and two of the games that Bulls won were really close. Bulls won game 2 with 3 points and they won game 6 with 1 one point so with a little bit luck that series could have turned out completely different. And it should not be forgotten that KJ was out a lot during the regular season and that he had much, much better years in '94 and '95.

So Houston beat the Suns two years in a row directly after the season when Jordan and the Bulls defeated the Suns.

Houston also beat the Jazz twice during the back-to-backs, who had the same stars in '97 and '98 when the Bulls won against them in two 6 game series with close games.

Pure stupidity to claim that Houston wouldn't have a chance, it only shows a lack of knowledge.

[iamgine]

96-97 Rockets. They were old. They were tired. Almost blew a 3-1 lead against Seattle. Had no extended rest. Had to play every couple of days. They didn't have the gas.

[Flash31]

What's that got to do with this? Regular season records don't mean shit in the playoffs.


Carlos Boozer and Thibs
severely disagree
Regular Season Champs All Day!

[Flash31]

You bring up 96-97 Rockets but how come
94-95,and 95-96 Bulls get a Pass

Same thing now
MJ played in the playoffs and lost yet he gets a pass
same with 88-89,89-90

But well,that Rockets team had team(player problems)
and the Utah Jazz werent exactly pushovers

[Flash31]

It doesn't say a whole lot but it's definitely an indication that the Rockets featuring Hakeem had their ways with the Bulls and that they were a bad match-up.

I like how everybody just dismiss the possibility that the Rockets could have beaten MJ when the Rockets beat basically beat all the teams from the Western Conference that MJ faced in the finals.


The Rockets could have and probably would have Beaten the Bulls
if they faced in the playoffs,
Shaqs young rookie self and his Magic beat the Bulls
Stockton and Malone were a shot away from a game 7


Those Bulls had weaknesses,pg,and Severe at C

Sampson,Hakeem would have been an extremely tough matchup

Rodman could have guarded one of them and even then Just too much size
Grant had no chance

Longley,Wennington,Salley come on
And if Rodman rested it would be over

MJ and his Bulls are brought up as Undefeatable when thats not the case,
Certain teams bothered them and they had trouble with

[sportjames23]

The Rockets could have and probably would have Beaten the Bulls
if they faced in the playoffs,
Shaqs young rookie self and his Magic beat the Bulls
Stockton and Malone were a shot away from a game 7


Those Bulls had weaknesses,pg,and Severe at C

Sampson,Hakeem would have been an extremely tough matchup

Rodman could have guarded one of them and even then Just too much size
Grant had no chance

Longley,Wennington,Salley come on
And if Rodman rested it would be over

MJ and his Bulls are brought up as Undefeatable when thats not the case,
Certain teams bothered them and they had trouble with


What the fvck are you even saying? You're all over the place with this.

Sampson was NOT on the 97 Rockets. The Bulls swept--SWEPT--that same young Magic team the next year after MJ had a full season under his belt. And playing the Bulls in the playoffs was a whole lot different than playing them in the regular season.

Oh, and speaking of regular season match ups? MJ was 5-1 vs Hakeem during the second Three-peat.

[jlip]

Because it's Jordan's league again and everyone gets a pass.

Hakeem was so lucky Jordan retired TBH. He would have suffered the same fate as Barkley, Ewing, Malone, Reggie, etc.

The question is why could they not get to the Finals. Jordan had absolutely nothing to do with that given he played in the East, and the Rockets were in the West.

[All Net]

Because that jazz team was damn good.

[97 bulls]

What the fvck are you even saying? You're all over the place with this.

Sampson was NOT on the 97 Rockets. The Bulls swept--SWEPT--that same young Magic team the next year after MJ had a full season under his belt. And playing the Bulls in the playoffs was a whole lot different than playing them in the regular season.

Oh, and speaking of regular season match ups? MJ was 5-1 vs Hakeem during the second Three-peat.
Not to mention the Bulls acquired Brian Williams who avg 16/9 with the Clippers the previous season and was only 28. He was rusty as his stats show, but found his niche after the first round of the playoffs by avg 9/5 on 50% shooting comming off the bench in limited minutes.

Ron Harper was an excellent defender.

That Bulls team had no weakness

[Flash31]

What the fvck are you even saying? You're all over the place with this.

Sampson was NOT on the 97 Rockets. The Bulls swept--SWEPT--that same young Magic team the next year after MJ had a full season under his belt. And playing the Bulls in the playoffs was a whole lot different than playing them in the regular season.

Oh, and speaking of regular season match ups? MJ was 5-1 vs Hakeem during the second Three-peat.



Wasn't Exclusively talking about just the 97 Rockets but the 94-97 Rockets
So When the Bulls swept the Magic team and Penny Hardaway having problems,it countS but the excuse book for MJ comes out every time he loses,yep sounds about right.

Somehow I don't see Wilt getting a pass for playing with knee problems and off knee surgery,
I don't see LeBron getting a pass for losing to the Spurs
I don't see Det getting a pass for losing to the Bulls
I don't see T-Mac getting a pass

It seems and is that MJ gets a pass for everything
His team wasn't good enough,his teammates were injured,he was older,he didnt have a full season under his belt,he didnt have Phil Jackson,Pippen was just a role player and rookie then

REALLY?

Yes so Stockton and Malone having injury problems,The Knicks being older,Hakeem getting older and his team falling apart,the Magic being a shell of what they once were,the Pacers being led by a one man show an aging star at that,
The Cavs being irrelevant as well as DET during that time span

That don't get a pass,but MJ gets every pass

Seriously,get off of his n uts
He's one of the goat,and yet you have people beliving he was perfect and giving him every excuse like he's their husband and abusive lover

I mean REALLY?

[chips93]

Because it's Jordan's league again and everyone gets a pass.

Hakeem was so lucky Jordan retired TBH. He would have suffered the same fate as Barkley, Ewing, Malone, Reggie, etc.

barkley ewing malon and reggie all got the same opportunity that hakeem got, to win rings in 94 and 95, and hakeem was the only one to take advantage.

how is that luck?

[andgar923]

What's that got to do with this? Regular season records don't mean shit in the playoffs.

About to post this.

The Bulls beat a number of teams in the playoffs that had a winning record against them in the regular season.

In other words, the Bulls have been underdogs and won.

[97 bulls]

Wasn't Exclusively talking about just the 97 Rockets but the 94-97 Rockets
So When the Bulls swept the Magic team and Penny Hardaway having problems,it countS but the excuse book for MJ comes out every time he loses,yep sounds about right.

Somehow I don't see Wilt getting a pass for playing with knee problems and off knee surgery,
I don't see LeBron getting a pass for losing to the Spurs
I don't see Det getting a pass for losing to the Bulls
I don't see T-Mac getting a pass

It seems and is that MJ gets a pass for everything
His team wasn't good enough,his teammates were injured,he was older,he didnt have a full season under his belt,he didnt have Phil Jackson,Pippen was just a role player and rookie then

REALLY?

Yes so Stockton and Malone having injury problems,The Knicks being older,Hakeem getting older and his team falling apart,the Magic being a shell of what they once were,the Pacers being led by a one man show an aging star at that,
The Cavs being irrelevant as well as DET during that time span

That don't get a pass,but MJ gets every pass

Seriously,get off of his n uts
He's one of the goat,and yet you have people beliving he was perfect and giving him every excuse like he's their husband and abusive lover

I mean REALLY?
I disagree. I dont think what they're saying is give Jordan a pass. The fact is the Bulls werent very good outside of Jordan in the 80s. How is this giving Jordan a pass?

Most logical people say the 95 Bulls lost to the Magic because they had no interior toughness. That changed when Rodman arrived.

On the flip side, ive always maintained that the Bulls have always been held to a higher standard than other teams. When the Bulls beat the Lakers and Pistons in 91, its excused as them onky being able to win due to the Pistons aging, and the Lakers aging and missing Jabaar and Cooper. The latter is obviously true, but why do the 80s juggernaut teams get a pass? They all beat each other when the loser was missing an integral part of their team, was injured, or old. And the Lakers played in a horrible Conference.

The 80 Lakers beat a Sixer team that didnt have Moses Malone

The 83 Sixers beat a Laker team that had a rookie James Worthy and Magic comming off n injury.

No one feels the 84 Lakers and 85 Celtics are an all-time great

The 86 Celtics beat a Rocket team that had noooooo business even being in the Finals. And benefited from being able to beat a Bucks team that had an injured Sidney Mincrief.

The 87 Lakers beat a banged up Celtics squad

The 88 Lakers beat a Pistons team with an injured Isaiah Thomas.

The 89 Pistons beat a Lakers team missing both Magic and Scott

The 90 Pistons beat a Bulls team with an injured Pippen

So why are the 80s teams excused?

[millwad]

Most logical people say the 95 Bulls lost to the Magic because they had no interior toughness. That changed when Rodman arrived.



They had no PF and that was the problem, if Jordan would have played the whole season it wouldn't have mattered. They just didn't have any bigs that could ball.




The 86 Celtics beat a Rocket team that had noooooo business even being in the Finals. And benefited from being able to beat a Bucks team that had an injured Sidney Mincrief.


What the hell are you talking about, you clown?
Rockets had very much business being in the finals, Olajuwon completely destroyed the Showtime Lakers in the playoffs and the Rockets took it to 6 games against one of the best rosters of all-time.

[millwad]

What the fvck are you even saying? You're all over the place with this.

Sampson was NOT on the 97 Rockets. The Bulls swept--SWEPT--that same young Magic team the next year after MJ had a full season under his belt. And playing the Bulls in the playoffs was a whole lot different than playing them in the regular season.

Oh, and speaking of regular season match ups? MJ was 5-1 vs Hakeem during the second Three-peat.

Stupid post.

Rodman was still playing for the Spurs and Grant left the Bulls and played for Orlando in '95. That was the main issue in '95 and the fact that Harper hadn't found his place yet.

You also "forgot" to mention that Horace Grant was injured in the 3rd Q of game 1 and didn't play anymore in that series. And Nick Anderson was also out for 1 game in that series. Shaq himself missed 30 games in the regular season as well and they weren't as good as the previous year.

And why do you mention the second 3-peat? We are discussing the Rockets vs Bulls match-up during Rockets back-to-backs.

[97 bulls]

Originally posted by millwad


What the hell are you talking about, you clown?Rockets had very much business being in the finals, Olajuwon completely destroyed the Showtime Lakers in the playoffs and the Rockets took it to 6 games against one of the best rosters of all-time.***

The Lakers were favored to get past the Rockets. Thats my point.

[97 bulls]

Stupid post.

Rodman was still playing for the Spurs and Grant left the Bulls and played for Orlando in '95. That was the main issue in '95 and the fact that Harper hadn't found his place yet.

You also "forgot" to mention that Horace Grant was injured in the 3rd Q of game 1 and didn't play anymore in that series. And Nick Anderson was also out for 1 game in that series. Shaq himself missed 30 games in the regular season as well and they weren't as good as the previous year.

And why do you mention the second 3-peat? We are discussing the Rockets vs Bulls match-up during Rockets back-to-backs.
Anderson did play in game 1. He was 0-7. Even with Hirace Grant the Bulls were up by 30

[millwad]

The Lakers were favored to get past the Rockets. Thats my point.

But there's no logic behind your statement that the Rockets had no business being in the finals. It was no luck behind them beating the Lakers, the Lakers got beaten pretty badly.

[millwad]

Anderson did play in game 1. He was 0-7. Even with Hirace Grant the Bulls were up by 30

They had issues with injuries and their big star missed 30 games in the regular season and their 3rd best PF only played one game in the series vs the Bulls.

And the Bulls got Rodman to take over after Grant, '95 was the one year gap where they neither had Grant or Rodman. And Harper found his place for the Bulls, something he didn't do in '95.

And the Magic lost game 2 and 4 with 5 points. In game 2 and 4 they were missing Grant and he was replaced by the scrub Koncak and in game 4 Anderson was replaced by Bowie.

[97 bulls]

But there's no logic behind your statement that the Rockets had no business being in the finals. It was no luck behind them beating the Lakers, the Lakers got beaten pretty badly.
No Logic? The Lakers were the reigning champs. They were all set to join the Celtics for round three. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY!!!! Outside of Houston thought the Rockets would win

[millwad]

No Logic? The Lakers were the reigning champs. They were all set to join the Celtics for round three. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY!!!! Outside of Houston thought the Rockets would win

Use you bain, please.

When writing that the Rockets had no business in the finals it means that it was all a fluke and that they didn't deserve to be in the finals.

A team that beats the defending champs in dominant fashion definitely has alot of business in the finals. Which the Rockets also proved they had when they took it to game 6 against on of the most talented roster of all-time.

[97 bulls]

Use you bain, please.

When writing that the Rockets had no business in the finals it means that it was all a fluke and that they didn't deserve to be in the finals.

A team that beats the defending champs in dominant fashion definitely has alot of business in the finals. Which the Rockets also proved they had when they took it to game 6 against on of the most talented roster of all-time.
So what you're saying is the Rockets were as good as the 80s Lakers.

[millwad]

So what you're saying is the Rockets were as good as the 80s Lakers.

Seriously, if that's your conclusion after reading my last post, then I have no words for you.

Is English your first language? You seem to use less fitting words a little bit too often while having a hard time reading and understanding for a person that would be from an English speaking country.

[jlip]

The absence of Grant in the '96 ECF and the addition of Rodman to the Bulls in '96 was easily the biggest factor in the difference between the '95 and '96 matchup between the Magic and Bulls. Horace Grant had possibly the greatest series of his career against his former team in '95. Plus he understood the triangle. Losing him was crucial.

[97 bulls]

Seriously, if that's your conclusion after reading my last post, then I have no words for you.

Is English your first language? You seem to use less fitting words a little bit too often while having a hard time reading and understanding for a person that would be from an English speaking country.
I comprehend English just fine. Using terms like they won in "dominant fashion" and say that win wasnt a fluke must feel they were supposed to win and were favored. Thus saying they were the better team.

Hiw about this..... did the Lakers lose to a better Rockets team or was it a fluke?

[millwad]

I comprehend English just fine. Using terms like they won in "dominant fashion" and say that win wasnt a fluke must feel they were supposed to win and were favored. Thus saying they were the better team.

Hiw about this..... did the Lakers lose to a better Rockets team or was it a fluke?

They lost to a better Rocket team, the Rocket bigs, especially Olajuwon just dominated the Lakers big time and they had no answer for it. They even tried to play it dirty with cheapshots from scrubs like Kupchak but in the ending that didn't matter either. The Rockets were just outplaying the Lakers.

[SmackOrH.A.K]

Because it's Jordan's league again and everyone gets a pass.

Hakeem was so lucky Jordan retired TBH. He would have suffered the same fate as Barkley, Ewing, Malone, Reggie, etc.
IGNORANT

Hakeem won a title in 94-95

MICHAEL JORDAN averaged 32ppg, 5apg, 7rpg, 1.5 bpg, 2spg, on 48% FG DURING THE 1994-1995 PLAYOFFS. Jordan lost to Shaq and Penny's Magic.

Shaq's Magic are the ONLY team to ELIMINATE JORDAN'S Bulls in the 90's.

IS THIS CLEAR?

[SmackOrH.A.K]

That being said, Jordan is obviously still the GOAT. The point I am making is that you cannot discredit Hakeem's rings because of Jordan's retirement.

Hell, Jordan was retired when Lebron won his 2 rings. Should we use that as another argument against LeBron.

[97 bulls]

They lost to a better Rocket team, the Rocket bigs, especially Olajuwon just dominated the Lakers big time and they had no answer for it. They even tried to play it dirty with cheapshots from scrubs like Kupchak but in the ending that didn't matter either. The Rockets were just outplaying the Lakers.
Point taken. Yet and still, the 86 Rockets are not an all-time great team. Thats who the 86 Celtics beat to win their championship. Granted, you can only play and beat whos in front of you. But all I ever read from the 80s loyalists is how the geat teams of the 80s (Lakers, Celtics, Sixers, and Pistons) beat each other while all teams in question were at their best thats not true.

Do you disagree?

[millwad]

Point taken. Yet and still, the 86 Rockets are not an all-time great team. Thats who the 86 Celtics beat to win their championship. Granted, you can only play and beat whos in front of you. But all I ever read from the 80s loyalists is how the geat teams of the 80s (Lakers, Celtics, Sixers, and Pistons) beat each other while all teams in question were at their best thats not true.

Do you disagree?


I don't really see where you're trying to go with this.

The '86 Rocket team was a very fine team and they beat one of the greatest teams of all-time a la the showtime Lakers and they gave the Celtics alot of competition. They were an elite team with just outstanding bigs.

I don't understand what you're trying to write in the last sentence.

With that said, MJ never beat an all-time great team.

[97 bulls]

With that said, MJ never beat an all-time great team.
This is exactly my point. If you feel the Lakers and Pistons werent considered an all-time great team, then you must feel the same about every other team. Because just like the 91Bulls the 83 Sixers, 86 Celtics, 87 Lakers, and 89 Pistons all beat a VERSION of whats considered their best team. Either they were missing key players, players were hurt, or players were old.

Id love to see a rebutal

[bdreason]

Because just throwing OLD all-stars together doesn't always work.

[L.Kizzle]

They were all well past their prime.

Now, if this team got together hell, 5 years prior they would have owned the league.

[No_Look604]

These guys were clearly out of their primes you fakkit

[crisoner]

"Wait a minute, hold on, get your ass up"
"Whassup *****?"
"Get over there, shit"
'Ya lil' punk, ass *****"
"C'mere, c'mere, c'mere boy"

"God damnit, you stop that shit now"
"Take him to jail and get him the hell from in front of this house"
"Now wait a minute, wait a minute, hey man"
"Whassup?"
"Wait a minute"
"There are police, go"

Give me that beat fool, it's a full time jack move
Chilly chill, yo homie make the track move
And I'll jack any Tom, Dick and Hank
That's the name of the suckers I done ganked

I get away from a copper
Drop a dime, I'll break you off somethin' proper
With the L E N C H M O B
T-Bone and that's J D

And here's how we'll greet ya
Stop fool, come off that beat ya
Feel dumb 'cuz you're caught in the dark
(Ya lil' nuttin' ass mark)

Raise up, 'cuz you can't have it back
You said, "I ain't never got gaffled like that"
Off the end of the gat you choke
Short dog's in the house, "Whattup Loc?"

Nuttin' but a come up
Gimme that bass and don't try to run up
'Cuz you'll get banked somethin' sweet
Ice Cube and the Lench Mob is jackin' for beats




http://cdn.hiphopdx.com/images/news/Ice_Cube-Ice_Cubes_Raiders_Documentary_Receives_Official_Pr emiere_Date.jpg

[NumberSix]

Because it's Jordan's league again and everyone gets a pass.

Hakeem was so lucky Jordan retired TBH. He would have suffered the same fate as Barkley, Ewing, Malone, Reggie, etc.
What does Jordan have to do with Houston losing to Utah?

[millwad]

This is exactly my point. If you feel the Lakers and Pistons werent considered an all-time great team, then you must feel the same about every other team. Because just like the 91Bulls the 83 Sixers, 86 Celtics, 87 Lakers, and 89 Pistons all beat a VERSION of whats considered their best team. Either they were missing key players, players were hurt, or players were old.

Id love to see a rebutal

Lakers was after the Abdul-Jabbar era and they never won anything without him. The '91 version of Lakers is not an all-time great team.

The '91 Detroit team was by no means an all-time great team either, they only won 50 games and Thomas missed more than 30 games. And Johnson was 34 and Laimbeer was 33, not the same team that won back-to-backs..

[97 bulls]

Lakers was after the Abdul-Jabbar era and they never won anything without him. The '91 version of Lakers is not an all-time great team.

The '91 Detroit team was by no means an all-time great team either, they only won 50 games and Thomas missed more than 30 games. And Johnson was 34 and Laimbeer was 33, not the same team that won back-to-backs..
Really? Who did the 86 Celtics beat thats considered an all-time great? The 83 Sixers? How bout the 89 Pistons? Or the 87 Lakers.

You cant possibly be this dumb.

[millwad]

Really? Who did the 86 Celtics beat thats considered an all-time great? The 83 Sixers? How bout the 89 Pistons? Or the 87 Lakers.

You cant possibly be this dumb.

What the hell are you talking about?
You're an idiot, use you god damn brain.

The '86 Celtic team was one of the most all-round teams of all-time and they dominated the '86 playoffs and they only lost 3 playoff games that whole year.

Starting 5:

PG: Dennis Johnson (Finals MVP, Hall of Fame, 5-time all-star, 10 time all-defensive team)

SG: Danny Ainge (All-Star)

SF: Larry Bird (MVP in '86, Hall of Fame, 3 time MVP, 2 time FINALS MVP)

PF: McHale (Hall of Fame, 7-time All-Star, 6 time All-Defensive team)

C: Parish (Hall of Fame, 9-time All-Star)


And your logic completely fails, if Houston wouldn't have dominated and kicked the showtime Lakers out of the playoffs and if the Lakers would have made it to the finals you would rank the Celtic '86 championship higher which proves your stupidity.

The Celtics beat the same team that destroyed the reigning champs, Lakers, and the same Laker team that would win the following year with the same core.

[97 bulls]

What the hell are you talking about?
You're an idiot, use you god damn brain.

The '86 Celtic team was one of the most all-round teams of all-time and they dominated the '86 playoffs and they only lost 3 playoff games that whole year.

Starting 5:

PG: Dennis Johnson (Finals MVP, Hall of Fame, 5-time all-star, 10 time all-defensive team)

SG: Danny Ainge (All-Star)

SF: Larry Bird (MVP in '86, Hall of Fame, 3 time MVP, 2 time FINALS MVP)

PF: McHale (Hall of Fame, 7-time All-Star, 6 time All-Defensive team)

C: Parish (Hall of Fame, 9-time All-Star)


And your logic completely fails, if Houston wouldn't have dominated and kicked the showtime Lakers out of the playoffs and if the Lakers would have made it to the finals you would rank the Celtic '86 championship higher which proves your stupidity.

The Celtics beat the same team that destroyed the reigning champs, Lakers, and the same Laker team that would win the following year with the same core.
The Rockets beat the Lakers because they matched up well with the Lakers. Not because they were the better team. I do feel the Lakers wouldve beat the Celtics because the team that the Celtics beat was extremely young or old. Kareem was 36, Worthy, and Scott were only 22. And Magic was 24.

Again, apply your own logic to both sides. You cant possibly think its fair to penalize the Bulls because because they beat that you consider old or missing or injured, then excuse the other teams who won under the same circumstances.

[millwad]

The Rockets beat the Lakers because they matched up well with the Lakers. Not because they were the better team. I do feel the Lakers wouldve beat the Celtics because the team that the Celtics beat was extremely young or old. Kareem was 36, Worthy, and Scott were only 22. And Magic was 24.

Again, apply your own logic to both sides. You cant possibly think its fair to penalize the Bulls because because they beat that you consider old or missing or injured, then excuse the other teams who won under the same circumstances.

Haha, what?

This is the most stupid thing I've read, so the Lakers lost even because of the match-up and not because the Rockets were a better team. That is beyond stupid.

In that case Jordan won all his titles due matching-up great against other teams, after all, no other team had a better guard than him.. :facepalm

I am applying my logic to both sides and no, the Bulls didn't win any titles while facing all-time great teams, they just didn't.

The Detroit team you're bringing up were old and Thomas was busted up, they weren't the same team they were during their back-to-backs. All-time great means all-time great in that particular season and not based on old resum

[fpliii]

97 Bulls - You're a good poster for the most part, but I don't understand why all of you are ganging up on millwad here. He's not even suggesting the Rockets would beat the Bulls, just that they'd make it a series and would have a chance if winning. Is that so outlandish to you guys, that you think they'd be completely outclassed by Chicago prior to their acquisition of Rodman (especially without Grant)?

[eliteballer]

They get a pass because of that supporting cast...and Barkley, Hakeem, Clyde were all on a hard decline.

Matt Maloney as starting PG?:oldlol:

[eliteballer]

It's just stupid and it doesn't make any sense at all.

Like in '93 the Bulls defeated the Phoenix Suns in 6 games in the finals and two of the games that Bulls won were really close. Bulls won game 2 with 3 points and they won game 6 with 1 one point so with a little bit luck that series could have turned out completely different. And it should not be forgotten that KJ was out a lot during the regular season and that he had much, much better years in '94 and '95.

So Houston beat the Suns two years in a row directly after the season when Jordan and the Bulls defeated the Suns.

Houston also beat the Jazz twice during the back-to-backs, who had the same stars in '97 and '98 when the Bulls won against them in two 6 game series with close games.

Pure stupidity to claim that Houston wouldn't have a chance, it only shows a lack of knowledge.

The Suns also didn't have Cedric Ceballos in the Finals..

[97 bulls]

[QUOTE=millwad]Haha, what?

This is the most stupid thing I've read, so the Lakers lost even because of the match-up and not because the Rockets were a better team. That is beyond stupid.

In that case Jordan won all his titles due matching-up great against other teams, after all, no other team had a better guard than him.. :facepalm

I am applying my logic to both sides and no, the Bulls didn't win any titles while facing all-time great teams, they just didn't.

The Detroit team you're bringing up were old and Thomas was busted up, they weren't the same team they were during their back-to-backs. All-time great means all-time great in that particular season and not based on old resum

[millwad]

97 Bulls - You're a good poster for the most part, but I don't understand why all of you are ganging up on millwad here. He's not even suggesting the Rockets would beat the Bulls, just that they'd make it a series and would have a chance if winning. Is that so outlandish to you guys, that you think they'd be completely outclassed by Chicago prior to their acquisition of Rodman (especially without Grant)?

Thank you.

It's pretty amazing how defensive people are about MJ and that they basically see him as untouchable. As you said I never wrote that they would beat the Bulls, only that the Rockets would have a possibility to win which they obviously would have.

When Utah could take it to 6 games twice, when Portland took it to 6 games, when Suns took it to 6 games and when Sonics took it 6 games I'm sure that the possibility would be there that the Rockets would have a chance to win against the Bulls. Especially since they matched up great against the Bulls and that they beat every team with close to same core in the playoffs, that MJ faced in the finals but Lakers.

[97 bulls]

97 Bulls - You're a good poster for the most part, but I don't understand why all of you are ganging up on millwad here. He's not even suggesting the Rockets would beat the Bulls, just that they'd make it a series and would have a chance if winning. Is that so outlandish to you guys, that you think they'd be completely outclassed by Chicago prior to their acquisition of Rodman (especially without Grant)?
Im not disagreeing with Millwad for his stance on the Rockets. My point is how can one teams championships be questioned due to injuries and missing players but other teams be legit when they also had the pleasure of defeating injured teams?

[millwad]

The Detroit Pistons weren't old. Go back and check the ages of the core.

And again for probably the fifth time. If your gonna penalize the Bulls by saying they beat the Pistons due to injuries, then apply the same logic to every other team. Celtics fans say the Lakers won in 87 due to Mchale playing on a fractured foot and Walton being injured. WHATS THE FRIGGN DIFFERENCE???????.

How about this. What makes the 83 Sixers, 87 Lakers, 86 Celtics, and 89 Pistons championships more legit than the Bulls?

Aguirre was 31, Edwards was 35, Johnson was 34 and Laimbeer was 33. They were an old team, stop writing BS lies.

And on top of that Thomas more than 30 games that season. You don't live on old resum

[millwad]

Im not disagreeing with Millwad for his stance on the Rockets. My point is how can one teams championships be questioned due to injuries and missing players but other teams be legit when they also had the pleasure of defeating injured teams?

You obviously have trouble reading or you're just a delusional person.

I didn't question the Bulls championships, you were spamming about facing all-time great teams and I told you that MJ didn't beat any of them. I don't consider any team that MJ faced in the 90's to be all-time great.

[97 bulls]

Thank you.

It's pretty amazing how defensive people are about MJ and that they basically see him as untouchable. As you said I never wrote that they would beat the Bulls, only that the Rockets would have a possibility to win which they obviously would have.

When Utah could take it to 6 games twice, when Portland took it to 6 games, when Suns took it to 6 games and when Sonics took it 6 games I'm sure that the possibility would be there that the Rockets would have a chance to win against the Bulls. Especially since they matched up great against the Bulls and that they beat every team with close to same core in the playoffs, that MJ faced in the finals but Lakers.
Lol this wasnt even our conversation. This.debate evolved due to me saying the 86 Lakers had no business losing to the Rockets. The Lakers were favored, the champs, etc. This was part of a post in which I stated why do the great 80s squads get a pass when they never beat each other at their best. They beat a version of those great teams much like the Bulls did vs the Pistons and Lakers in 91.

[millwad]

Lol this wasnt even our conversation. This.debate evolved due to me saying the 86 Lakers had no business losing to the Rockets. The Lakers were favored, the champs, etc. This was part of a post in which I stated why do the great 80s squads get a pass when they never beat each other at their best. They beat a version of those great teams much like the Bulls did vs the Pistons and Lakers in 91.

How does that nonsense even make sense?

The Lakers got outplayed without any question by the Rockets and Olajuwon absued Kareem and the Laker bigs and so did Sampson. How did Lakers having no business in losing to the Rockets? The Rockets played much better basketball and it's not harder than that.

I mean, I really hope you understand what your argument is because you nonsense doesn't make any sense at all. First you say that the Rockets who dominated the Lakers had no business in winning that series while they obviously proved that they were playing better basketball.

And then you start to talk about that the '91 version of the Pistons and Lakers being all-time great teams.

What the hell is your argument?

[97 bulls]

[QUOTE=millwad]Aguirre was 31, Edwards was 35, Johnson was 34 and Laimbeer was 33. They were an old team, stop writing BS lies.

And on top of that Thomas more than 30 games that season. You don't live on old resum

[millwad]

Lol since when is 31 considered old? What about Dennis Rodman? Joe Dumars? John Salley? How could you leave them out? Shows the type of poster you are.

You're really mentally challenged, I said that they were an old team, not that everyone was old.

They had six player that were 33 years or older and among the starters Laimbeer was 33 years old, Johnson was 34 years old and Edwards was 35 years old. And on the bench they had Henderson who was 35 years old and also Long and Rollins who were 34 and 35 years old.

Among the 5 best scorers in the regular season, 3 of them were 33 years or older.

[97 bulls]

How does that nonsense even make sense?

The Lakers got outplayed without any question by the Rockets and Olajuwon absued Kareem and the Laker bigs and so did Sampson. How did Lakers having no business in losing to the Rockets? The Rockets played much better basketball and it's not harder than that.

I mean, I really hope you understand what your argument is because you nonsense doesn't make any sense at all. First you say that the Rockets who dominated the Lakers had no business in winning that series while they obviously proved that they were playing better basketball.

And then you start to talk about that the '91 version of the Pistons and Lakers being all-time great teams.

What the hell is your argument?This isnt how this evolved. I was responding to a post by I believe flash31 where he feels Jordan got a pass for losing in 95 vs the Magic. I disagreed by stating The Bulls never get a pass and are even held to a standard other all-time great teams don't have to meet. I then list the 80s juggernaut teams and their opponents shortcommings. Which are the same as the Pistons and Lakers in 91. Players were missing, players were old, or too young, players were comming off injuries or playing injured.

Whats the friggn difference???

[97 bulls]

You're really mentally challenged, I said that they were an old team, not that everyone was old.

They had six player that were 33 years or older and among the starters Laimbeer was 33 years old, Johnson was 34 years old and Edwards was 35 years old. And on the bench they had Henderson who was 35 years old and also Long and Rollins who were 34 and 35 years old.

Among the 5 best scorers in the regular season, 3 of them were 33 years or older.
Lol gtfo. Are you really listing the end of the bench players? The 10,11, and 12 players? Unbelievable. Tree Rollins? :facepalm :facepalm

[millwad]

This isnt how this evolved. I was responding to a post by I believe flash31 where he feels Jordan got a pass for losing in 95 vs the Magic. I disagreed by stating The Bulls never get a pass and are even held to a standard other all-time great teams don't have to meet. I then list the 80s juggernaut teams and their opponents shortcommings. Which are the same as the Pistons and Lakers in 91. Players were missing, players were old, or too young, players were comming off injuries or playing injured.

Whats the friggn difference???

Seriously, your English is very weak, I don't get your argument because of your weak English.

And you claimed that Lakers and Pistons in '91 were all-time great teams, that was what I reacted to because that is just nonsense and then you made some weird ass arguments about how the Rockets having no business being in the '86 finals when they gave the Lakers a big time beating and gave the Celtics a great run for they money.

And what are the standards? What were the all-time great teams that Jordan beat during his championship runs?

[millwad]

Lol gtfo. Are you really listing the end of the bench players? The 10,11, and 12 players? Unbelievable. Tree Rollins? :facepalm :facepalm

Ok, you're definitely mentally challenged.

Did you read the last sentence, 3 out of the top 5 best scorers were 33 years or older. The Pistons were an old team in '91, why are you trying to deny something that's obvious?

And not only were they old, Thomas was injured during the season and he missed more than 30 games and the Pistons only won 50 games that season. Nothing about that particular season and team that year had any all-time great over it.

[97 bulls]

Seriously, your English is very weak, I don't get your argument because of your weak English.

And you claimed that Lakers and Pistons in '91 were all-time great teams, that was what I reacted to because that is just nonsense and then you made some weird ass arguments about how the Rockets having no business being in the '86 finals when they gave the Lakers a big time beating and gave the Celtics a great run for they money.

And what are the standards? What were the all-time great teams that Jordan beat during his championship runs?
No, your comprehension skills are at a 2nd grade level. I never said the 91'Pistons or Lakers were all-time greats. I said the 86 Rockets, the 83 Lakers, the 87 Celtics, and 89 Lakers were all-time great teams as well. Why are those.championships respected and the Bulls not?

[97 bulls]

Ok, you're definitely mentally challenged.

Did you read the last sentence, 3 out of the top 5 best scorers were 33 years or older. The Pistons were an old team in '91, why are you trying to deny something that's obvious?

And not only were they old, Thomas was injured during the season and he missed more than 30 games and the Pistons only won 50 games that season. Nothing about that particular season and team that year had any all-time great over it.
Lol their top three scorers were 27, 29, and 31. Their best defenders were in ther (Rodman, Salley, Dumars) were in their 20s.

What makes the 83 Lakers an all-time great team?

[millwad]

No, your comprehension skills are at a 2nd grade level. I never said the 91'Pistons or Lakers were all-time greats. I said the 86 Rockets, the 83 Lakers, the 87 Celtics, and 89 Lakers were all-time great teams as well. Why are those.championships respected and the Bulls not?

You can't even write one sentence without abusing the English language. English is not my paternal language but I have no issues with it, you on the other hand, half of the stuff you write barely makes any sense because of your lacking writing skills.

And no, you clown, you wrote that the Rockets in '86 had no business to be in the finals, you didn't them an all-time great team.

And no one said that the Bulls championships aren't respected, I just wrote that they never faced any all-time great teams during their runs and that is the truth.

[97 bulls]

You can't even write one sentence without abusing the English language. English is not my paternal language but I have no issues with it, you on the other hand, half of the stuff you write barely makes any sense because of your lacking writing skills.

And no, you clown, you wrote that the Rockets in '86 had no business to be in the finals, you didn't them an all-time great team.

And no one said that the Bulls championships aren't respected, I just wrote that they never faced any all-time great teams during their runs and that is the truth.
English bad yada yada.

Were the 86 Rockets an all-time great team?

[millwad]

English bad yada yada.

Were the 86 Rockets an all-time great team?

No.

They had the potential to be an all-time great team but Sampson's injuries and drugs ruined what could have become a legacy.

[97 bulls]

No.

They had the potential to be an all-time great team but Sampson's injuries and drugs ruined what could have become a legacy.
This is all Im saying. So we both agree the Celtics didnt face an all-time great team. Dont forget the Bucks, who had beaten the Celtics a few years prior, were hampered with an injury to Moncrief.

Were the 80 Sixers an all-time great team? Mind you they didnt have Moses Malone.

[millwad]

This is all Im saying. So we both agree the Celtics didnt face an all-time great team. Dont forget the Bucks, who had beaten the Celtics a few years prior, were hampered with an injury to Moncrief.

Were the 80 Sixers an all-time great team? Mind you they didnt have Moses Malone.

You really are mentally challenged.
You just wrote;


riginally Posted by 97 bulls
No, your comprehension skills are at a 2nd grade level. I never said the 91'Pistons or Lakers were all-time greats. I said the 86 Rockets, the 83 Lakers, the 87 Celtics, and 89 Lakers were all-time great teams as well. Why are those.championships respected and the Bulls not?

So first you write that the '86 Rockets were an all-time great team and now you change it again, what a dumbass.

The '86 Rocket team would beat any team Jordan won against during the runs.
Celtics beat freaking Lakers earlier in the finals and they were definitely an all-time great team.

Bulls on the other hand never faced an all-time great team.

[97 bulls]

You really are mentally challenged.
You just wrote;



So first you write that the '86 Rockets were an all-time great team and now you change it again, what a dumbass.

The '86 Rocket team would beat any team Jordan won against during the runs.
Celtics beat freaking Lakers earlier in the finals and they were definitely an all-time great team.

Bulls on the other hand never faced an all-time great team.
The 86 Rockets are not an all-time great. I never said such. I do agree that the 83 Sixers, 87 Lakers, 86 Celtics, and, 89 Pistons were all-time greats.

My point is THEY DIDNT BEAT ALL-TIME GREATS. As I stated earlier, they (like the Bulls in 91) beat a version of each other.

[millwad]

The 86 Rockets are not an all-time great. I never said such. I do agree that the 83 Sixers, 87 Lakers, 86 Celtics, and, 89 Pistons were all-time greats.

My point is THEY DIDNT BEAT ALL-TIME GREATS. As I stated earlier, they (like the Bulls in 91) beat a version of each other.

Hey, moron, why did you wrote the following then;

"
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
No, your comprehension skills are at a 2nd grade level. I never said the 91'Pistons or Lakers were all-time greats. I said the 86 Rockets, the 83 Lakers, the 87 Celtics, and 89 Lakers were all-time great teams as well. Why are those.championships respected and the Bulls not?

[guy]

Technically, no one ever gets a pass for their failures since we would think more highly of them if those failures were actually successes. For example, if the 97 Rockets get to the Finals, they are thought of as a greater team, especially if they win the Finals, and Hakeem, Barkley, and Drexler are all thought of more highly as a result. Same thing can be said about Jordan in 95, Kobe in 08, Lebron in 09, Durant in 13, etc.

[97 bulls]

Hey, moron, why did you wrote the following then;

"
"Were" is a typo. I should've typed "weren't". I think its more than clear that I dont feel any of the losers of those finals should be considered all-time great. Just look at the context of every other post.

[sportjames23]

97 Bulls doin' work. :cheers:

[SilkkTheShocker]

97 bulls getting owned by millwad :oldlol:

[97 bulls]

97 bulls getting owned by millwad :oldlol:
Perhaps youd like to step in for him. Why did the 83'Sixers, 87 Lakers,.86 Celtics, or 89 Pistons beat an all-time great team? Or a version similar to what the Bulls did in 91.

Just to recap. The Lakers never beat the Sixers with Moses Malone. When the Sixers beat the Lakers, Magic was comming off an injury, James Worthy was a Rookie, and Byron Scott wasnt in the league yet. The Pistons beat the Lakers without Magic or Scott. The Lakers were well on their way to losing to the Pistons in 88 before Isaiah Thomas badly sprained his ankle. The Lakers never beat the Celtics at full strength. Bill Walton was out and Mchale played on a bad foot. The Celtics didnt even play an all-time great team in 86. And beat a Bucks team that had their best player hurt. The Pistons beat a Bulls team with Pippen being injured. And the Bulls beat the Lakers and Pistons when they didnt have Cooper and Jabaar, and Isiash Thomas was comming back from an injury. And mind you, pro 80s fans dont consider this. They wanted the Bulls to be able to transport themselves into 83, 87, 89, and 86 and beat thise exact teams. Even though the others never did such.

For some reason, all the other great championship teams of the 80s is respected but the Bulls isnt held in as high regard because they didnt beat the 83 Sixers, the 86 Celtics, the 87 Lakers, or 89 Pistons.

[Nevaeh]

Perhaps youd like to step in for him. Why did the 83'Sixers, 87 Lakers,.86 Celtics, or 89 Pistons beat an all-time great team? Or a version similar to what the Bulls did in 91.

Just to recap. The Lakers never beat the Sixers with Moses Malone. When the Sixers beat the Lakers, Magic was comming off an injury, James Worthy was a Rookie, and Byron Scott wasnt in the league yet. The Pistons beat the Lakers without Magic or Scott. The Lakers were well on their way to losing to the Pistons in 88 before Isaiah Thomas badly sprained his ankle. The Lakers never beat the Celtics at full strength. Bill Walton was out and Mchale played on a bad foot. The Celtics didnt even play an all-time great team in 86. And beat a Bucks team that had their best player hurt. The Pistons beat a Bulls team with Pippen being injured. And the Bulls beat the Lakers and Pistons when they didnt have Cooper and Jabaar, and Isiash Thomas was comming back from an injury. And mind you, pro 80s fans dont consider this. They wanted the Bulls to be able to transport themselves into 83, 87, 89, and 86 and beat thise exact teams. Even though the others never did such.

For some reason, all the other great championship teams of the 80s is respected but the Bulls isnt held in as high regard because they didnt beat the 83 Sixers, the 86 Celtics, the 87 Lakers, or 89 Pistons.


Operation " Bring Jordan Down A Peg" has been in full swing on ISH for years now 97 Bulls. You just have to stay on your toes like usual for any new angles to discredit the Bulls' dynasty.

[guy]

Perhaps youd like to step in for him. Why did the 83'Sixers, 87 Lakers,.86 Celtics, or 89 Pistons beat an all-time great team? Or a version similar to what the Bulls did in 91.

Just to recap. The Lakers never beat the Sixers with Moses Malone. When the Sixers beat the Lakers, Magic was comming off an injury, James Worthy was a Rookie, and Byron Scott wasnt in the league yet. The Pistons beat the Lakers without Magic or Scott. The Lakers were well on their way to losing to the Pistons in 88 before Isaiah Thomas badly sprained his ankle. The Lakers never beat the Celtics at full strength. Bill Walton was out and Mchale played on a bad foot. The Celtics didnt even play an all-time great team in 86. And beat a Bucks team that had their best player hurt. The Pistons beat a Bulls team with Pippen being injured. And the Bulls beat the Lakers and Pistons when they didnt have Cooper and Jabaar, and Isiash Thomas was comming back from an injury. And mind you, pro 80s fans dont consider this. They wanted the Bulls to be able to transport themselves into 83, 87, 89, and 86 and beat thise exact teams. Even though the others never did such.

For some reason, all the other great championship teams of the 80s is respected but the Bulls isnt held in as high regard because they didnt beat the 83 Sixers, the 86 Celtics, the 87 Lakers, or 89 Pistons.

Great posts. The early 80s Sixers and Rockets, who were the Finals losers from 80-82 were nothing special. The 86 Rockets were great, but nothing special and led by young players. The 87 Celtics were banged up. The 88 Pistons had an injured Isiah in game 6 and a controversial call against them at the end of the series. The 89 Lakers were pretty much decimated. According to Jordan/Bulls detractors and their criteria, there's literally only like 3 legit championships in NBA history.

[97 bulls]

Originally posted by Neveah
Operation " Bring Jordan Down A Peg" has been in full swing on ISH for years now 97 Bulls. You just have to stay on your toes like usual for any new angles to discredit the Bulls' dynasty.***

This exactly what it is. They can't come to grips with the fact that Jordan is the greatest ever. And the Bulls are the greatest team ever, and have the best and second best record ever etc. Which is why this forum is constantly bombarded with these strange scenarios set up to defame the 90s Bulls.



Originally posted by Guy

Great posts. The early 80s Sixers and Rockets, who were the Finals losers from 80-82 were nothing special. The 86 Rockets were great, but nothing special and led by young players. The 87 Celtics were banged up. The 88 Pistons had an injured Isiah in game 6 and a controversial call against them at the end of the series. The 89 Lakers were pretty much decimated. According to Jordan/Bulls detractors and their criteria, there's literally only like 3 legit championships in NBA history.
Exactly. Why is the criteria so much different.for the Bulls? Notice how none of them come in here to respond.

[Nevaeh]

Great posts. The early 80s Sixers and Rockets, who were the Finals losers from 80-82 were nothing special. The 86 Rockets were great, but nothing special and led by young players. The 87 Celtics were banged up. The 88 Pistons had an injured Isiah in game 6 and a controversial call against them at the end of the series. The 89 Lakers were pretty much decimated. According to Jordan/Bulls detractors and their criteria, there's literally only like 3 legit championships in NBA history.

The irony of it all is that the Bulls faced:

A fully healthy Blazers team, in 92
A fully healthy Suns team in 93, with an MVP winning Barkley
A fully healthy Jazz team in 97, with an MVP winning K Malone
A fully healthy ( and Finals experienced) Jazz team in 98

And in every one of those years, the Bulls were facing direct PEERS!! Not guys who were too young to know what they were doing, not too old to not be able to do what they used to.

The Jazz were even lucky enough to have a second shot at it, to prove they weren't a "fluke" team, so there's THAT too.

[millwad]

The irony of it all is that the Bulls faced:

A fully healthy Blazers team, in 92
A fully healthy Suns team in 93, with an MVP winning Barkley
A fully healthy Jazz team in 97, with an MVP winning K Malone
A fully healthy ( and Finals experienced) Jazz team in 98

And in every one of those years, the Bulls were facing direct PEERS!! Not guys who were too young to know what they were doing, not too old to not be able to do what they used to.

The Jazz were even lucky enough to have a second shot at it, to prove they weren't a "fluke" team, so there's THAT too.

Yeah, great "knowledge"..

KJ had a crappy year and he missed 30+ games in the regular season and was struggling all year long.

[Nevaeh]

Yeah, great "knowledge"..

KJ had a crappy year and he missed 30+ games in the regular season and was struggling all year long.

Yet he somehow managed to play every game in the finals, right? In Pro sports, EVERY player is playing through pain by the end of the season, and you should know that. And it's not like Pip was playing a 100% during the 98 Bulls' finals run either, right? Where's your "sympathy" for poor pip?

:confusedshrug:

:rolleyes:

[97 bulls]

Yet he somehow managed to play every game in the finals, right? In Pro sports, EVERY player is playing through pain by the end of the season, and you should know that. And it's not like Pip was playing a 100% during the 98 Bulls' finals run either, right? Where's your "sympathy" for poor pip?

:confusedshrug:

:rolleyes:
Dennis Rodman played through nagging injuries as well during the 98 playoffs.

Pippen played on a bad back through the 97 playoffs after landing on his back in the first round on that game winning dunk vs the Bullets.

Michael Jordan played on a bad big toe through the 91 Finals. Remember when he tried changing shoes to see if it would help? If I remember correct, they cut the soles of his shoes in an effort to relieve pressure. He just gutted it out.

It just shows the clear agenda

[LAZERUSS]

I don't see what there is to argue. The '97 Bulls would have routed the '97 Rockets. The 64-18 Jazz whipped the 57-25 Rockets in the WDF's, 4-2. And then the 69-13 Bulls beat that Jazz team, 4-2, in the Finals. Even a pre-schooler could have figured that one out.