Jordan and Pippen Bulls vs 1999 Spurs and 2000 Lakers

[robert_shaww]

Lets say Jordan keeps playing in 99 and 00, and bulls get to the finals both years healthy (its possible, in 99 the 8th seed knicks played the finals and in 00 the pacers for the first time)

Without home-court advantage in a 2-3-2 series format.

For San Antonio and Los Angeles roster was the first finals ever, for the Bulls (7th and 8th)

[riseagainst]

6/8

[robert_shaww]

6/8

:wtf:

[3ball]

Jordan at 35, making it look easy against duncan and robinson in 1998.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQePkBnD0vo

I think Jordan would have won in 1999 because the season was strike-shortened to 50 games, but lost in 2000 because he would have been a little too far past his prime at that point.

[Demitri98]

He'd win in 99 because the shortened lockout season makes it easier on his old body.

He'd also win in 2000 because the Lakers never threepeat if Phil stays in Chicago, providing MJ gets to the Finals. I can't see the 2000 Pacers or the Iverson Sixers beating them in a 7 game series though.

8/8.

[Nikola_]

they barely beat spurs in 7, i think sean elliot bothered MJ that last season , he had atrocius FG% against the spurs (check his 12-39 game)
no to mention pop,duncan,robinson (does kerr stay with the bulls?)

in 00 they lost to lakers in 6, its 37 year old MJ, and they basically had always problems with centers, but since nobody contained shaq, its clear to me who is the winner.

[Demitri98]

they barely beat spurs in 7, i think sean elliot bothered MJ that last season , he had atrocius FG% against the spurs (check his 12-39 game)

in 00 they lost to lakers in 6, its 37 year old MJ, and they basically had always problems with centers, but since nobody contained shaq, its clear to me who is the winner.
Problem is Phil is still with Chicago. I doubt the Lakers succeed like they did without Phil taming the lions (Kobe and Shaq).

[ninephive]

Jordan at 35, making it look easy against duncan and robinson in 1998.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQePkBnD0vo

I think Jordan would have won in 1999 because the season was strike-shortened to 50 games, but lost in 2000 because he would have been a little too far past his prime at that point.
The video is titled "Michael Jordan: Owning the Spurs (30 points)," but I guess the poster must have forgot that Robinson had 35 on better shooting in the SAME GAME.

Also, Duncan had an off-game. I think you can count on him for more that 14 in a 7-game series.

[Myth]

He'd win in 99 because the shortened lockout season makes it easier on his old body.

He'd also win in 2000 because the Lakers never threepeat if Phil stays in Chicago, providing MJ gets to the Finals. I can't see the 2000 Pacers or the Iverson Sixers beating them in a 7 game series though.

8/8.

If that is the case, 2000 Blazers would be against the Bulls. That would be th matchup to consider.

[T_L_P]

Phil is the decider. The 99 Bulls wouldn't have been much better than the 99 Lakers, who the Spurs swept, but one of the best coaches ever can do a lot for a team.

But the Spurs were dominant in the Playoffs that year. They went 15-2 I believe, and I'm not so sure if the Bulls could have stopped both Duncan and Robinson in a series. Elliott was solid on Jordan, too.

[robert_shaww]

Phil is the decider. The 99 Bulls wouldn't have been much better than the 99 Lakers, who the Spurs swept, but one of the best coaches ever can do a lot for a team.

But the Spurs were dominant in the Playoffs that year. They went 15-2 I believe, and I'm not so sure if the Bulls could have stopped both Duncan and Robinson in a series. Elliott was solid on Jordan, too.

spurs were 1 posesion away of playing a game 6 vs the 8th seed less ewing knicks. what make you think they are winning against the 3 time defending champs?? rodman could stop duncan...and dont forget about scottie and kukoc...

bulls in 6, imo.

[ninephive]

spurs were 1 posesion away of playing a game 6 vs the 8th seed less ewing knicks. what make you think they are winning against the 3 time defending champs?? rodman could stop duncan...and dont forget about scottie and kukoc...

bulls in 6, imo.
Didn't lose the series...
Didn't win in 7...
Didn't win in 6...

In other words, the only way the Spurs would have convinced you that they would have beat the Bulls is if they would have swept the ENTIRE PLAYOFFS.

[Big#50]

I remember Jordan saying NUMBER 21 would have beat him in 99.

[3ball]

I remember Jordan saying NUMBER 21 would have beat him in 99.
:roll: