Name me one team (All Time) that managed to win it all without their Superstar player

[k0kakw0rld]

I'm waiting...

[AirBonner]

2004 pistons never had a superstar :rolleyes:

[Spurs5Rings2014]

1980 Lakers.

[k0kakw0rld]

2004 pistons never had a superstar :rolleyes:
It does not count lol

[Done_And_Done]

It sorta counts though K0ka lol

[Horatio33]

Seattle in 78. They didn't have a superstar.

[k0kakw0rld]

It sorta counts though K0ka lol
I'm trying to prove a point here, help a brother out lol

I am aware that they did not have a real superstar but you could argue that Billups was their best player? So let's say we remove Chauncey from the lineup. Do they Pistons still win in 2004? :confusedshrug:

[GrapeApe]

There's been title winners without a superstar, but no team has ever won a title without THEIR superstar. I assume that's what OP means, though I'm not sure what he's getting at.

[FreezingTsmoove]

2014 Spurs

[k0kakw0rld]

There's been title winners without a superstar, but no team has ever won a title without THEIR superstar. I assume that's what OP means, though I'm not sure what he's getting at.
You are correct.

But in this case, I think Rookie Magic winning FMVP, counts too.


A reference to the Warriors v Rockets game. How they supposedly collapsed when Curry was out of the game. They kinda did for a short period of time. But they were able to build another solid lead and ended up winning by 28 points. Bottom line is Curry has a terrific supporting cast. They go as far as he brings them but they are more than capable to win matches without him, especially against this Rockets team. They could take care of the Rockets without Curry for sure. Instead of a sweep, it will probably be in 6 or 7.

[L.Kizzle]

1970 Knicks. Reed wasn't Reed the last half of the series (because of injury.)

[Smook A.]

It does not count lol
It actually could cause the 04 Pistons really didn't have a superstar on that team.

[LAZERUSS]

1970 Knicks. Reed wasn't Reed the last half of the series (because of injury.)

You beat me to it.

In fact, the series was tied 2-2, and the Knicks were down by 10 points in game five when Reed went down.

They basically won that series without Reed doing anything in the last three games.

[Uncle Drew]

You beat me to it.

In fact, the series was tied 2-2, and the Knicks were down by 10 points in game five when Reed went down.

They basically won that series without Reed doing anything in the last three games.
And Wilt still couldn't take advantage.

[L.Kizzle]

And Wilt still couldn't take advantage.
Wilt scored 45 in game 6 I believe.

[Uncle Drew]

Willis Reed came out in game 7 and had Wilt SHOOK. Wilt then proceeded to miss 10 out of 11 free throws, as he shot the lowest % from the line in the history of the Finals (at least 10 attempts).

[LAZERUSS]

Willis Reed came out in game 7 and had Wilt SHOOK. Wilt then proceeded to miss 10 out of 11 free throws, as he shot the lowest % from the line in the history of the Finals (at least 10 attempts).

Yeah...Reed's FT defense was sensational in that game.

The REALITY was, Reed did NOTHING in the last THREE games of that series.

BTW, Chamberlain was playing in that series only four months removed from major knee surgery, and was nowhere near 100%.

Just watch footage of Wilt in that game seven, and then his game five two years later in the Finals. In his '70 series he had practically no elevation, and his lateral movements were limited. In his '72 series, he is getting called for questionable goal-tends at 12 feet. Hell, he scored 24 points in that game five in the '72 Finals, and could easily have scored 40.

As for Reed, prior to the '70 Finals, Chamberlain OWNED Reed in their career H2H's. Even as late as the '69 season, he slaughtered Reed in their two H2H games. Reed never had a chance against a prime Wilt.

[ClipperRevival]

Wilt scored 45 in game 6 I believe.

He did. But why couldn't he even come close to duplicating that against a gimp in game 7? He smelled blood and didn't attack. He wasn't a killer. That's why that dude lost multiple playoff series he shouldn't have.

[Uncle Drew]

Yeah...Reed's FT defense was sensational in that game.

The REALITY was, Reed did NOTHING in the last THREE games of that series.

BTW, Chamberlain was playing in that series only four months removed from major knee surgery, and was nowhere near 100%.

Just watch footage of Wilt in that game seven, and then his game five two years later in the Finals. In his '70 series he had practically no elevation, and his lateral movements were limited. In his '72 series, he is getting called for questionable goal-tends at 12 feet. Hell, he scored 24 points in that game five in the '72 Finals, and could easily have scored 40.

As for Reed, prior to the '70 Finals, Chamberlain OWNED Reed in their career H2H's. Even as late as the '69 season, he slaughtered Reed in their two H2H games. Reed never had a chance against a prime Wilt.
Yet he lost twice to Reed in the Finals.

[Uncle Drew]

Hell, he scored 24 points in that game five in the '72 Finals, and could easily have scored 40.
:roll:

Why is it always would/could/should with Wilt? Why not stay with the facts? Why always build castles in the air?

[3ball]

.



Lebron had no chance in 2015 Finals


Lebron let a 7 ppg role player (Iggy) be > Curry.. Iggy averaged 17 ppg, so that's a 10 point swing.

But even WITH Lebron's defense allowing Iggy to get 17 ppg (instead of 7 ppg), and even WITH Lebron shooting an abysmal 39%, the Cavs were still competitive and won 2 games - clearly, if he holds Iggy to 7 ppg and shoots 50%, the Cavs win easily.





MJ couldn't have won in 2015 Finals with that injured Cavs team


MJ won the 1998 championship with less supporting production than Lebron got in 2015:



Mosgov's 14/8 on 55% > Pippen's 15 ppg on 41%

JR Smith's 12 ppg on 32% < Kukoc's 15 ppg on 50%

Tristan's 10/13 > Rodman's 4/8 (Rodman was so horrible he wasn't even a starter)

Delly/Shumpert's 7-8 ppg on 27% = Kerr/Harper's 4-5 ppg on 35%


MJ won with less help because his defense didn't let a 7 ppg role player be > Karl Malone, nor did he shoot 39% against repeated single coverage.

It's amazing - even WITH Lebron's defense allowing a 7 ppg role player (Iggy) to average 17 ppg, and even WITH Lebron shooting an abysmal 39%, the Cavs were still competitive and won 2 games - obviously, the Cavs win easily if he holds Iggy to 7 ppg and shoots 50%.
.

[3ball]

oh whoops, wrong thread

[LAZERUSS]

He did. But why couldn't he even come close to duplicating that against a gimp in game 7? He smelled blood and didn't attack. He wasn't a killer. That's why that dude lost multiple playoff series he shouldn't have.

Yeah...same as MJ in his '86 first round sweeping loss. Had 63 (in double OT BTW) in a game two loss, and followed it up with a white-flag game of 19 points on 8-18 shooting in a blowout clinching loss in game three.

Of course the major difference? MJ was healthy and in his prime in '86. He would average a career high 37 ppg the very next season (and then completely puke all over the floor in yet another first round sweeping loss...and with a 9-35 series clinching performance.)

Meanwhile, a '70 Wilt was nearly 34, and playing in a post season only four months after major knee surgery. Oh, and in that game seven, he was the ONLY Laker to play well. Of course only an idiot would call a 21-24 game a "choke job."

You really need to stop posting on anything related to Wilt. You have proven to have done ZERO research, and have repeatedly been DESTROYED in any discussions about him.

[LAZERUSS]

Yet he lost twice to Reed in the Finals.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

HE didn't lose, his TEAM did. And again, both series were by a 34-36 year old Chamberlain, playing on a surgically repaired knee, and nowhere near his prime.

Of course, a PEAK Kareem "lost" to Reed in the '70 playoffs as well. In fact, his team was blown out, 4-1, and in the clinching 132-96 blowout loss, Reed outplayed and outscored a peak Kareem.

[3ball]

He would average a career high 37 ppg the very next season (and then completely puke all over the floor in yet another first round sweeping loss...and with a 9-35 series clinching performance.


MJ never lost with a good roster that was favored, whereas Lebron and Wilt both did, multiple times

[ClipperRevival]

Yeah...same as MJ in his '86 first round sweeping loss. Had 63 (in double OT BTW) in a game two loss, and followed it up with a white-flag game of 19 points on 8-18 shooting in a blowout.

Of course the major difference? MJ was healthy and in his prime in '86. He would average a career high 37 ppg the very next season (and then completely puke all over the floor in yet another first round sweeping loss...and with a 9-35 series clinching performance.

Meanwhile, a '70 Wilt was nearly 34, and playing in a post season only four months after major knee surgery. Oh, and in that game seven, he was the ONLY Laker to play well. Of course only an idiot would call a 21-24 game a "choke job."

You really need to stop posting on anything related to Wilt. You have proven to have done ZERO research, and have repeatedly been DESTROYED in any discussions about him.
You really bashing MJ for losing to the consensus GOAT team ever with a 40 win team? Your man lost when he shouldn't have. MJ didn't. That's the difference.

[Uncle Drew]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

HE didn't lose, his TEAM did.
So Wilt lost. Thanks for agreeing with me. Reed had Wilt shook in game 7, and you know it. Wilt never recovered that night when he saw Reed coming out of the locker room.

[Uncle Drew]

Speaking of Reed coming out of the locker room: that is dedication. Good for him. Major props. Giving everything to win that championship. Of course, there are players who rather ask their coach to take them out in the Finals, when they're not hurt.

[LAZERUSS]

You really bashing MJ for losing to the consensus GOAT team ever with a 40 win team? Your man lost when he shouldn't have. MJ didn't. That's the difference.

Chamberlain didn't lose. His TEAM did. How come you didn't mention Jerry West getting his ass handed to him by Frazier in that game seven loss?

As for consensus GOAT team, Chamberlain dragged a 40-40 roster, that had gone 34-46 the year before, to a game seven, one point loss, against a 62-18 Celtic team that was at it's peak in the '65 EDF's, and did so with a monumental 30-31 .555 series, which included a game seven performance of 30 points, on an 80%, and with 32 rebounds. Oh, and he scored Philly's last eight points against a helpless Russell in that near unfathomable upset.

[ClipperRevival]

So Wilt lost. Thanks for agreeing with me. Reed had Wilt shook in game 7, and you know it. Wilt never recovered that night when he saw Reed coming out of the locker room.

When Wilt wins, he is GOAT. When he loses and lays eggs in games that should've secured him a few more rings, it's not his fault. He can't lose.

[LAZERUSS]

Speaking of Reed coming out of the locker room: that is dedication. Good for him. Major props. Giving everything to win that championship. Of course, there are players who rather ask their coach to take them out in the Finals, when they're not hurt.

If you are referring to Wilt, please provide us with the evidence. I can tell you this much, even Wilt's COACH, who hated Wilt, claimed that Chamberlain was injured. Of course, the biggest coaching blunder of his career ensued when he left Wilt on the bench in the last three minutes, and after Wilt had asked to go back in.

As for Reed, he didn't come back into game five after he was injured, and completely missed game six.

BTW, Chamberlain had almost the exact same injury in the '68 EDF's, and not only played 48 mpg in that seven game series, he averaged a 22-25-7.

[LAZERUSS]

When Wilt wins, he is GOAT. When he loses and lays eggs in games that should've secured him a few more rings, it's not his fault. He can't lose.

Same with MJ. His teammates get blamed for losing in his first six seasons, and then he gets the credit for his six rings, playing with a roster that went an injury-riddled 55-27 without him, and were a blown call away from probably winning the Finals. And even worse, MJ couldn't take that same exact roster to a title the very next season. Yep...when he loses...teammates fault. When he shoots 5-19 in a Finals series clinching win, he was the hero.

[ClipperRevival]

Same with MJ. His teammates get blamed for losing in his first six seasons, and then when he gets the credit for his six rings, playing with a roster that went an injury-riddled 55-27 without him, and were a blown call away from probably winning the Finals. And even worse, MJ couldn't take that same exact roster to a title the very next season. Yep...when he loses...teammates fault. When he shoots 5-19 in a Finals series clinching win, he was the hero.

Please man. A great indicator of how good a team is is by regular season record. When a team has 40 wins and another has 65, that's a mismatch. Wilt lost when he had superior teams. MJ never did and even won 6 playoff series without HCA. Even won 2 finals without HCA (1993 and 1998).

[Uncle Drew]

Of course, the biggest coaching blunder of his career ensued when he left Wilt on the bench in the last three minutes, and after Wilt had asked to go back in.
Coaching blunder? The Lakers had cut the lead to 1, without Wilt. Wilt just gave up, because a 9 point deficit seemed ''too much'' to overcome. Everyone in the world would choose not to bring Wilt back in. Of course, this had also to do with the pressure in those last three minutes, which Wilt didn't always deal with too well.

[ClipperRevival]

Check that. 1986 Bulls won 30 games while 1986 Celtics won 67 games. So only a 37 game win difference. He had no chance. But he averaged 44 ppg on 50% shooting with 6 rpg, 6 apg and 2 spg in that series. Not to mention an NBA record 63 point playoff game. That's when Bird referred to MJ as God in sneakers.

[LAZERUSS]

Coaching blunder? The Lakers had cut the lead to 1, without Wilt. Wilt just gave up, because a 9 point deficit seemed ''too much'' to overcome. Everyone in the world would choose not to bring Wilt back in. Of course, this had also to do with the pressure in those last three minutes, which Wilt didn't always deal with too well.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Get your facts straight. It was a SEVEN point deficit. West hit the two FTAs after Wilt finally went to the bench. Furthermore, the Lakers had cut 10 points off of a 17 point deficit in a little over four minutes.

In their last five minutes, without Wilt, they cut six more points off (and then had it go back to four.) And Wilt's replacement, Mel Counts, missed a shot with a minute left, and then had a horrible turnover in the last thirty seconds. And BTW, he also shot 4-13 from the floor, while Chamberlain went 7-8.

Van Breda Kolff knew he was about to be fired, and quit almost immediately after that coaching debacle. He would coach at the pro level for a couple of more years, and with losing seasons. Meanwhile, three years later Chamberlain would lead the Lakers to their first ever title in Los Angeles.

[LAZERUSS]

Check that. 1986 Bulls won 30 games while 1986 Celtics won 67 games. So only a 37 game win difference. He had no chance. But he averaged 44 ppg on 50% shooting with 6 rpg, 6 apg and 2 spg in that series. Not to mention an NBA record 63 point playoff game. That's when Bird referred to MJ as God in sneakers.

And how about his "God-like" performance in the clinching (and sweeping) blowout loss of that series? Where was yet another 63 point performance? After all, you expected Wilt to hang a 45 point game seven in the '70 Finals (and at nowhere near 100%.)

[3ball]

When he shoots 5-19 in Game 6 of 1996 Finals, he was the hero.


Jordan had 22/9/7 and was the only Bull that played good defense on his man - he held Hawkins to 1-4 and 4 points, which was 12 points below his average, and the Bulls WON by 12 points.

Jordan's defense made him the hero because every other Bull let their man go off:


Schrempf destroyed Pippen for 23 points on 59%, Kemp destroyed Rodman for 18/10 on 48%, and Payton destroyed Harper for 21 points on 53%.





a roster that went 55-27 without him


The Bulls went from 3-peat dynasty with Jordan, to 2nd Round team without him - that's GOAT impact.

Interestingly, the Bulls' DRtg in 1994 (6th) wasn't any better relative to the league than the first 3-peat (7th, 4th, 7th).

Accordingly, the massive decline from 3-peat dynasty to 2nd Round team was due entirely to the absence of MJ's goat offense (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12082990&postcount=185), which caused their ORtg to crater from #1 all-time (during the 3-peat) to 14th in the league in 1994.






Yep...when he loses...teammates fault.


MJ also had the GOAT impact on bad teams.. In 1989, the 47-win Bulls would've missed the 45-win playoff cut without Jordan's 33/8/8 on 54%.

So the 1989 roster was a LOTTERY roster that Jordan carried to 6 games with the world champions, just like Lebron did in 2015 - except Jordan led that lottery roster all season, while Lebron only led a lottery roster beginning in the Finals.

And look at 2009 - Lebron's supporting cast added enough help on top of his 28/8/7 to win 66 games... Compare that to the 1989 Bulls, who only added enough help on top of Jordan's 33/8/8 to win 47 games.

The only possible reasons for the Cavs winning 19 more games despite Lebron's inferior production is that his supporting cast was better and/or they played inferior competition.. Obviously, the 19 additional wins isn't ONLY due to inferior competition - it's due to better supporting cast as well.
.

[LAZERUSS]

In Game 6 of 1996 Finals, Jordan had 22/9/7 and was the only Bull that held his man down on defense - he held Hawkins to 1-4 and 4 points, which was 12 points below his average, and the Bulls WON by 12 points.

Jordan's defense made him the hero because every other Bull let their man go off:


Schrempf destroyed Pippen for 23 points on 59%, Kemp destroyed Rodman for 18/10 on 48%, and Payton destroyed Harper for 21 points on 53%.



The Bulls declined massively without Jordan - from 3-peat dynasty to 2nd Round team.

Interestingly, the Bulls' DRtg in 1994 (6th) wasn't any better relative to the league than the first 3-peat (7th, 4th, 7th).

Accordingly, the massive decline from 3-peat dynasty to 2nd Round team was due entirely to the absence of MJ's goat offense (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12082990&postcount=185), which caused their ORtg to crater from #1 all-time (during the 3-peat) to 14th in the league in 1994.




3-peat to 2nd Round is the GOAT impact on a good team, and MJ also had the GOAT impact on bad teams.. In 1989, the 47-win Bulls would've missed the 45-win playoff cut without Jordan's 33/8/8 on 54%.

So the 1989 roster was a LOTTERY roster that Jordan carried to 6 games with the world champions, just like Lebron did in 2015 - except Jordan led that lottery roster all season, while Lebron only led a lottery roster beginning in ECF.

Furthermore, in 2009, Lebron's supporting cast added enough help on top of his 28/8/7 to win 66 games... Compare that to the 1989 Bulls, who only added enough help on top of Jordan's 33/8/8 to win 47 games.

The only possible reasons for the Cavs winning 19 more games despite Lebron's inferior production is that Lebron's supporting cast was better and/or they played inferior competition.. Obviously, the 19 additional wins isn't ONLY due to inferior competition - it's due to better supporting cast as well.

This has REPEATEDLY been DESTROYED.

The '94 Bulls went 55-27. Furthemore, they did so with their TWO best players missing a combined 22 games. How important was that? They would lose a game seven, on the road, to a NY team that had gone 56-26. They also were cheated out of a win at NY in game five by a HORRIFIC call in the last second of a one point loss. Oh, and they were undefeated in their five home playoff games. Oh, and in that Knick series, MJ's "replacement", Pete Myers, averaged 7 ppg!

That same NY team lost to the 58-24 Rockets on the road, in a game seven, by four points, and in fact, outscored the Rockets in the series/

The '94 Bulls were ONE blown call away from a title.

But even worse, MJ returned, fuilly healthy, and well-rested, late in the '95 season, and in fact, in his 5th game back, put up a 55 point game. And before someone lauds the Bulls record of 13-4 with MJ...Grant had played at a pace just the previous season, of 12-5 in a 17 game span. Furthermore, Pippen single-handedly carried that '95 roster, to a 34-31 record ...without BOTH MJ and GRANT. And in fact, they had started jelling before MJ returned, going 8-2 in their last 10 games.

Despite all of that, and certainly a heavy favorite with MJ returning...they were eliminated by GRANT's Magic in the ECSF's, in a series in which GRANT just imposed his will on the Bulls.

And that is why the Bulls management went after RODMAN in '96. They KNEW that Jordan could not win without a 55+ win roster, and without a DOMINANT PF.

The Bulls were of the 90's would have been title contenders withOUT Jordan.

[ClipperRevival]

This has REPEATEDLY been DESTROYED.

The '94 Bulls went 55-27. Furthemore, they did so with their TWO best players missing a combined 22 games. How important was that? They would lose a game seven, on the road, to a NY team that had gone 56-26. They also were cheated out of a win at NY in game five by a HORRIFIC call in the last second of a one point loss. Oh, and they were undefeated in their five home playoff games. Oh, and in that Knick series, MJ's "replacement", Pete Myers, averaged 7 ppg!

That same NY team lost to the 58-24 Rockets on the road, in a game seven, by four points, and in fact, outscored the Rockets in the series/

The '94 Bulls were ONE blown call away from a title.

But even worse, MJ returned, fuilly healthy, and well-rested, late in the '95 season, and in fact, in his 5th game back, put up a 55 point game. And before someone lauds the Bulls record of 13-4 with MJ...Grant had played at a pace just the previous season, of 12-5 in a 17 game span. Furthermore, Pippen single-handedly carried that '95 roster, to a 34-31 record ...without BOTH MJ and GRANT. And in fact, they had started jelling before MJ returned, going 8-2 in their last 10 games.

Despite all of that, and certainly a heavy favorite with MJ returning...they were eliminated by GRANT's Magic in the ECSF's, in a series in which GRANT just imposed his will on the Bulls.

And that is why the Bulls management went after RODMAN in '96. They KNEW that Jordan could not win without a 55+ win roster, and a DOMINANT PF.

The Bulls were of the 90's would have been title contenders withOUT Jordan.

I always laugh when you say the 1993-94 Bulls missed the title by one blown call. Let's just make stuff up and ignore reality. Lol.

[LAZERUSS]

MJ also had the GOAT impact on bad teams.. In 1989, the 47-win Bulls would've missed the 45-win playoff cut without Jordan's 33/8/8 on 54%.


We saw what "impact" Jordan had with bad teams. They were SWEPT in the first round. He needed two all-time greats in Pippen and Grant (who should be in the HOF BTW) to even have a winning record.

How about Wilt? Took a last place roster to a game six, two point loss against the 59-16 Celtics in his rookie season. And a couple of years later, and with no teammate playing worth a shit, single-handedly carried his 49-31 Warriors to a game seven, two point loss against a 60-20 HOF-laden Celtic team that was favored in EVERY game of that series.

And a few years later, Wilt took a 40-40 team, that had gone 34-46 the previous season (and was TRADED for THREE players BTW from that bottom-feeding team) to a game seven, one point loss against a 62-18 Celtics team at their zenith of their dynasty.

Of course we all saw what happened a couple of years later, when Wilt finally had a roster that was the EQUAL of Russell's. A DOMINANT title, which included a brutal beatdown of Russell and his eight-time defending champs in the process.

[LAZERUSS]

I always laugh when you say the 1993-94 Bulls missed the title by one blown call. Let's just make stuff up and ignore reality. Lol.

REALITY.

ONE BLOWN CALL.

[ClipperRevival]

REALITY.

ONE BLOWN CALL.

Ok. I guess the planet where you're from, being eliminated in the 2nd round is one call away from a title. The 2013 Spurs were one play away from a title.

[LAZERUSS]

Ok. I guess the planet where you're from, being eliminated in the 2nd round is one call away from a title. The 2013 Spurs were one play away from a title.

You could make a case that the '13 Spurs were one blown defensive assignment away from a title.

Same with Wilt. Lost FOUR game SEVEN's, to the eventual champions, by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points. Factor in that the officiating in game five of the 70's Finals was called suspicious by a NY Time writer, and Chamberlain was an eyelash away from FIVE more titles.

Hell, you can carry this all the way out to what John Wooden claimed. Swap rosters with Russell in their ten years in the league together, and Wilt probably could have had as many as 12 rings.

[3ball]

:rolleyes:

[3ball]

The Bulls would've been contenders WITHOUT Jordan in the 90's


In 1989, the Bulls were lottery without MJ, so how could they be "contenders" in the 90's without him?

That makes no sense.. :yaohappy:

In 1989, the 47-win Bulls would've missed the 45-win playoff cut without Jordan's 33/8/8 on 54% - so that roster WAS a lottery roster - they were a lottery team heading into the 1990 season without Jordan, instead of ECF veterans and 1 year away from starting their first 3-peat.





This has REPEATEDLY been DESTROYED.


Facts can't be destroyed - the Bulls were a 3-peat dynasty with Jordan, and a 2nd Round team without.

Those are the facts - if we wanted him to prove his 3-peat to 2nd Round impact, we'd have him come back and 3-peat again - done and done.

That's GOAT impact.. But keep dreaming because it's fun informing you of the facts.

Interestingly, the Bulls' DRtg in 1994 (6th) wasn't any better relative to the league than the first 3-peat (7th, 4th, 7th).. Accordingly, the massive decline from 3-peat dynasty to 2nd Round team was due entirely to the absence of MJ's goat offense (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12082990&postcount=185), which caused their ORtg to crater from #1 all-time (during the 3-peat) to 14th in the league in 1994.

[ClipperRevival]

You could make a case that the '13 Spurs were one blown defensive assignment away from a title.

Same with Wilt. Lost FOUR game SEVEN's, to the eventual champions, by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points. Factor in that the officiating in game five of the 70's Finals was called suspicious by a NY Time writer, and Chamberlain was an eyelash away from FIVE more titles.

Hell, you can carry this all the way out to what John Wooden claimed. Swap rosters with Russell in their ten years in the league together, and Wilt probably could have had as many as 12 rings.
I could argue that you like to make things up instead of seeing reality.

[LAZERUSS]

In 1989, the Bulls were lottery without MJ, so how could they be "contenders" in the 90's without him?.... :yaohappy:

In 1989, the 47-win Bulls would've missed the 45-win playoff cut without Jordan's 33/8/8 on 54% - so that roster WAS a lottery roster and would've been a lottery team heading into the 1990 season without Jordan, instead of 1 year away from starting their first 3-peat.



Facts can't be destroyed - the Bulls were a 3-peat dynasty with Jordan, and a 2nd Round team without.

Those are the facts - and if we wanted him to prove his 3-peat to 2nd Round impact, we'd have him come back and 3-peat again - done and done.

That's GOAT impact.. But keep dreaming because it's fun crushing you with the facts.

The Bulls won 47 games not because of MJ, who was a career loser before they arrived, but because of the winning presence of Pippen and Grant. And as their responsibilities increased, such as the '91 ECF's and Finals, the Bulls became the best team in the league, and by a HUGE margin. Easily the most talented rosters in the watered-down 90's.

I have asked the question before...we saw what the '94 Bulls were able to accomplish withOUT Jordan. And injury-riddled roster, with Pete Myers replacing MJ,...went 55-27, and were a blown call away from going to the ECF's, where they would have faced a team, the Pacers they wiped out 4-1 during the regular season. Then they would have faced the Rockets in the Finals...a team that the 56-26 Knicks outplayed (just as the Bulls outplayed that NY team.)

Now, here is the question...take MJ off the Bulls in the 90's...BUT, also take the best player away from EVERY OTHER team in the 90's. No Barkley, no Ewing, no Robinson, no Hakeem, no Malone..etc, etc...and how many rings would the Bulls have won in that decade? I would say at least six.


And BTW, you also seem to be forgetting MJ's massive failure in the '95 post-season. Couldn't take a 55+ win roster, with the exception being MJ replaced Grant...as far as Grant had the previous season, without Jordan. How come? In fact, they were wiped out in six games by a Magic team that would get swept in the Finals by a 47 win Rockets team. NOWHERE NEAR the impact that Grant had had with the '94 Bulls.

[ClipperRevival]

The Bulls won 47 games not because of MJ, who was a career loser before they arrived, but because of the winning presence of Pippen and Grant. And as their responsibilities increased, such as the '91 ECF's and Finals, the Bulls became the best team in the league, and by a HUGE margin. Easily the most talented rosters in the watered-down 90's.

I have asked the question before...we saw what the '94 Bulls were able to accomplish withOUT Jordan. And injury-riddled roster, with Pete Myers replacing MJ,...went 55-27, and were a blown call away from going to the ECF's, where they would have faced a team, the Pacers they wiped out 4-1 during the regular season. Then they would have faced the Rockets in the Finals...a team that the 56-26 Knicks outplayed (just as the Bulls outplayed that NY team.)

Now, here is the question...take MJ off the Bulls in the 90's...BUT, also take the best player away from EVERY OTHER team in the 90's. No Barkley, no Ewing, no Robinson, no Hakeem, no Malone..etc, etc...and how many rings would the Bulls have won in that decade? I would say at least six.


And BTW, you also seem to be forgetting MJ's massive failure in the '95 post-season. Couldn't take a 55+ win roster, with the exception being MJ replaced Grant...as far as Grant had the previous season, without Jordan. How come? In fact, they were wiped out in six games by a Magic team that would get swept in the Finals by a 47 win Rockets team. NOWHERE NEAR the impact that Grant had had with the '94 Bulls.

Lol. And you defend Wilt for missing most of 1970 but don't give MJ the same leeway when he only played 17 regular season games? He didn't have his bball legs and feel for the game. The proof is when he 3 peated again.

[LAZERUSS]

I could argue that you like to make things up instead of seeing reality.

And I same of you.

The '94 Bulls were not an ordinary second round playoff loser. They were cheated, plain-and-simple. But, not only that, had Pippen and Grant not missed a combined 22 games in that season, they likely would have won at least 60 games, instead of the 55 that they did win. And, as we know, 60 wins would have meant HCA throughout the playoffs ...where, BTW, the Bulls went undefeated.

Again... a 55 win team that was easily a 60+ win team had they been healthy. That is REALITY.

And given how things played out...with the Knicks losing a game seven, on the road, to a 58 win Rockets team, and by four points...

well, there is a legitimate argument that a healthy '94 Bulls team would have won a title.

[LAZERUSS]

Lol. And you defend Wilt for missing most of 1970 but don't give MJ the same leeway when he only played 17 regular season games? He didn't have his bball legs and feel for the game. The proof is when he 3 peated again.

MJ didn't come back from major knee surgery did he? Hell, he played 17 games, which is an exhibition season, and in fact, scored 55 points in only his 5th game back.

BTW, Wilt averaged 12 ppg in his three games back before the playoffs, and was NEVER close to the Wilt before the injury...ever again. He was still a force, but not the unstoppable offensive force that he had been. Oh wait, I shouldn't say unstoppable...since we KNOW that his COACH stopped him in the '69 post-season.

VBK with the classic line..."When we pass the ball into Wilt, he will score. But it is an ugly offense to watch." So, instead, he had Wilt play the high post, so that Baylor could shoot .385 in the entire post-season.

[ClipperRevival]

And I same of you.

The '94 Bulls were not an ordinary second round playoff loser. They were cheated, plain-and-simple. But, not only that, had Pippen and Grant not missed a combined 22 games in that season, they likely would have won at least 60 games, instead of the 55 that they did win. And, as we know, 60 wins would have meant HCA throughout the playoffs ...where, BTW, the Bulls went undefeated.

Again... a 55 win team that was easily a 60+ win team had they been healthy. That is REALITY.

And given how things played out...with the Knicks losing a game seven, on the road, to a 58 win Rockets team, and by four points...

well, there is a legitimate argument that a healthy '94 Bulls team would have won a title.

Like I said, if you think the 1993-94 Bulls were one blown call away from a ring, you have a problem with seeing reality. Anyone that distorted is hard to be taken seriously in that topic. You also blamed MJ for losing to a team that won 37 more games, which again shows your inability to be objective. Please man. Accept the fact that your man came up short and move on. You always try to bring other greats down to Wilt's level.

[3ball]

The Bulls won 47 games not because of MJ


Let me get this straight - the Bulls DIDN'T win 47 games because of the guy getting 33/8/8.

They won because of the scrawny, 2nd year player getting 14/5 (Pippen).

:coleman:






we saw what the '94 Bulls were able to accomplish withOUT Jordan.


Agreed - the Bulls fell from 3-peat dynasty to 2nd Round team.

If we wanted Jordan to prove his 3-peat to 2nd Round impact, we'd have him come back and 3-peat again - done and done.

That's GOAT impact..

Interestingly, the Bulls' DRtg in 1994 (6th) wasn't any better relative to the league than the first 3-peat (7th, 4th, 7th).. Accordingly, the massive decline from 3-peat dynasty to 2nd Round team was due entirely to the absence of MJ's goat offense (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12082990&postcount=185), which caused their ORtg to crater from #1 all-time (during the 3-peat) to 14th in the league in 1994.





Now, here is the question...take MJ off the Bulls in the 90's...BUT, also take the best player away from EVERY OTHER team in the 90's.

and how many rings would the Bulls have won in that decade? I would say at least six.


In 1989, the 47-win Bulls would've missed the 45-win playoff cut without Jordan's 33/8/8 on 54% - so that roster was a LOTTERY roster heading into the 1990 season without Jordan, instead of ECF veterans and 1 year away from starting their first 3-peat.

So you think they'd win 6 rings without Jordan in the 90's after being a LOTTERY team without Jordan in 1989?

So now PIPPEN goes 6/6 and is the GOAT instead of Jordan??

What planet are you from.. :yaohappy:

[LAZERUSS]

Like I said, if you think the 1993-94 Bulls were one blown call away from a ring, you have a problem with seeing reality. Anyone that distorted is hard to be taken seriously in that topic. You also blamed MJ for losing to a team that won 37 more games, which again shows your inability to be objective. Please man. Accept the fact that your man came up short and move on. You always try to bring other greats down to Wilt's level.

Chamberlain never came up short. His TEAM's did. Which is why I mentioned MJ's 30 and 40 win teams getting swept in the first round. I don't blame MJ any more than you should blame Wilt.

And before you try to bring up '68, you already KNOW that Wilt, and his Sixers were DECIMATED by injuries. And still lost a game seven by four points.

'69? You can't blame Wilt for his COACH having Chamberlain play the high post. And you certainly can't blame Wilt for that game seven loss, (18 points, on 7-8 shooting, with 27 rebounds....to Russell's 6 points, on 2-7 shooting, with 21 rebounds.)

'70? The 60-22 Knicks would have been a favorite even if Chamberlain had been 100%. He wasn't, and with West and company choking in game seven, against an overall, much better team, was not Wilt's fault.

You can go right down the line.

[ClipperRevival]

Chamberlain never came up short. His TEAM's did. Which is why I mentioned MJ's 30 and 40 win teams getting swept in the first round. I don't blame MJ any more than you should blame Wilt.

And before you try to bring up '68, you already KNOW that Wilt, and his Sixers were DECIMATED by injuries. And still lost a game seven by four points.

'69? You can't blame Wilt for his COACH having Chamberlain play the high post. And you certainly can't blame Wilt for that game seven loss, (18 points, on 7-8 shooting, with 27 rebounds....to Russell's 6 points, on 2-7 shooting, with 21 rebounds.)

'70? The 60-22 Knicks would have been a favorite even if Chamberlain had been 100%. He wasn't, and with West and company choking in game seven, against an overall, much better team, was not Wilt's fault.

You can go right down the line.

:hammertime: Not Wilt's fault.

[LAZERUSS]

Let me get this straight - the Bulls DIDN'T win 47 games because of the guy getting 33/8/8.

They won because of the scrawny, 2nd year player getting 14/5 (Pippen).

How come the '87 Bulls didn't win shit, and with Jordan scoring a career-high 37 ppg? Losing record, and swept in the first round of the playoffs.

If you are trying to minimize Pippen's and Grant's IMPACT, you have NOTHING to stand on. We saw what those two did withOUT Jordan. A 55+ win team that should have won a title.

How about MJ without Pippen and Grant? A career loser. Pippen and Grant without MJ...career winners. In fact, Grant DRAMATICALLY raised EVERY team he played for, and even contributed to yet another title later on, and without MJ.

Sorry, but MJ was the same shot-jacking player he always had been. But, surrounded with rosters that could win 55+ games without him...six titles.

[3ball]

How come the '87 Bulls didn't win shit, and with Jordan scoring a career-high 37 ppg? Losing record, and swept in the first round of the playoffs.


The same reason Lebron missed the playoffs 2 years in a row and Curry 3 years in a row.

Otoh, Jordan MADE playoffs every year, including 1987, which means he led his team to higher competitive status relative to his competition than Lebron and Curry did.






If you are trying to minimize Pippen's and Grant's IMPACT, you have NOTHING to stand on.

We saw what those two did withOUT Jordan in 1994


You can't compare 1989 Pippen to 1994 Pippen - that's pretty dumb.

1989 was Pippen's 2nd season and he wasn't a good player yet - he only averaged 14/6, including 10/5 in ECF vs. the Pistons... That's the worst 2nd option anyone could have.





Sorry, but MJ was the same shot-jacking player he always had been.


Jordan has superior efficiency in the postseason than Lebron, in all the efficiency measures: Jordan has higher TS, FG% and ORtg.

So Jordan wasn't a shot-jacker - his efficiency made him deadly at high volume.. You'll never see anyone average 30+ attempts in a series and shoot 50%... Only Jordan was good enough to handle that kind of volume at elite efficiency.





We saw what those two did withOUT Jordan.


The Bulls fell from 3-peat dynasty to 2nd Round team.

If we wanted Jordan to prove his 3-peat to 2nd Round impact, we'd have him come back and 3-peat again - done and done.

That's GOAT impact..

Interestingly, the Bulls' DRtg in 1994 (6th) wasn't any better relative to the league than the first 3-peat (7th, 4th, 7th).. Accordingly, the massive decline from 3-peat dynasty to 2nd Round team was due entirely to the absence of MJ's goat offense (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12082990&postcount=185), which caused their ORtg to crater from #1 all-time (during the 3-peat) to 14th in the league in 1994.

[Bless Mathews]

Lazerus gettin slayed to the moon.

Jordan is the goat of goats in any sport.

Deal with it.

[Horatio33]

You beat me to it.

In fact, the series was tied 2-2, and the Knicks were down by 10 points in game five when Reed went down.

They basically won that series without Reed doing anything in the last three games.

Reed came in for game 7, popped two jumpers, and Wilt folded like a deck chair. A game after Wilt had 45 on hapless Nate Bowman. All Wilt had to do was have one more monster game, but he mentally checked out. He had a guy guarding him playing on one leg and he only score 21 points. Wilt Chokerlain.

[Uncle Drew]

REALITY.

ONE BLOWN CALL.
You are mentally ill. How can you be one call away from winning a title, in the 2nd round? That's an easy thing to say if it fits your agenda, because no one knows how they would have done in the ECF and the championship round.

But I'll play, watch:

They were one call away from being swept in the Conference finals.

:banana:

[k0kakw0rld]

Lazerus gettin slayed to the moon.

Jordan is the goat of goats in any sport.

Deal with it.
Jaromir Jagr :pimp:

[pauk]

Nobody won without the teams best player.... closest would be Magic in 80' but i think its not absurd to think he was already more impactful than Kareem and Kareem missed only 1 game that series.

[Duffy Pratt]

'70? The 60-22 Knicks would have been a favorite even if Chamberlain had been 100%. He wasn't, and with West and company choking in game seven, against an overall, much better team, was not Wilt's fault.



I will basically agree with you, since its a team game.

Going back to the original question. Reed went out with eight minutes played in game five and the Knicks pretty far behind. The Knicks dug themselves a deeper hole by playing Wilt traditionally, using Bowman and Bill Hosket to cover him.

At halftime, Bradley suggested they play small ball, using basically a 3-2 zone (which was of course illegal at the time). Thus, the biggest man on the court for the Knicks was the 6-7 Debusschere. They held Wilt to 4 points in the second half, and blanked West for the half, while forcing 30 turnovers for the game, in one of the most stunning defensive displays I've ever seen (I was there.).

The suspicious officiating came from not calling illegal D on the zone the Knicks were playing. Was the loss Wilt's fault? Only to the extent that the Lakers were single-mindedly focused on trying to take advantage of a mismatch, when they couldn't even get decent entry passes to Wilt, and he was only getting the ball out of position.

Game 6 was a blow out. The strategy wouldn't work a second time, and definitely not in LA. Reed's contribution in game 7 was to provide his team, and just as important, the crowd, with an emotional lift. Hitting the first two shots set the tone for the game. But it was Frazier's game. And if you had to "blame" one person for the loss, it would be West and not Wilt. Frazier completely dominated West that game.

[Round Mound]

This has REPEATEDLY been DESTROYED.

The '94 Bulls went 55-27. Furthemore, they did so with their TWO best players missing a combined 22 games. How important was that? They would lose a game seven, on the road, to a NY team that had gone 56-26. They also were cheated out of a win at NY in game five by a HORRIFIC call in the last second of a one point loss. Oh, and they were undefeated in their five home playoff games. Oh, and in that Knick series, MJ's "replacement", Pete Myers, averaged 7 ppg!

That same NY team lost to the 58-24 Rockets on the road, in a game seven, by four points, and in fact, outscored the Rockets in the series/

The '94 Bulls were ONE blown call away from a title.

But even worse, MJ returned, fuilly healthy, and well-rested, late in the '95 season, and in fact, in his 5th game back, put up a 55 point game. And before someone lauds the Bulls record of 13-4 with MJ...Grant had played at a pace just the previous season, of 12-5 in a 17 game span. Furthermore, Pippen single-handedly carried that '95 roster, to a 34-31 record ...without BOTH MJ and GRANT. And in fact, they had started jelling before MJ returned, going 8-2 in their last 10 games.

Despite all of that, and certainly a heavy favorite with MJ returning...they were eliminated by GRANT's Magic in the ECSF's, in a series in which GRANT just imposed his will on the Bulls.

And that is why the Bulls management went after RODMAN in '96. They KNEW that Jordan could not win without a 55+ win roster, and without a DOMINANT PF.

The Bulls were of the 90's would have been title contenders withOUT Jordan.

:applause:

And Lets Not Forget That Pippen Was 4th In PER in the 93-94 Season and 7th in the 94-95 Season (Not To Mention The Only Perimeter Player In The Top 10 In Defensive Rating For Both Seasons)