Top 5 Greatest NBA Teams since the 1970?

[IGOTGAME]

who do you have? I'm sure everyone will have the 96 Bulls but I'm curious as to the other picks.

[WayOfWad3]

I won't include this year's Warriors since they still haven't won it all. I'll just keep it to a simple list for now:
1. 86' Celtics
2. 96' Bulls
3. 87' Lakers
4. 01' Lakers
5. 13' Miami Heat (healthy, and a biased pick)

[IGOTGAME]

I won't include this year's Warriors since they still haven't won it all. I'll just keep it to a simple list for now:
1. 86' Celtics
2. 96' Bulls
3. 87' Lakers
4. 01' Lakers
5. 13' Miami Heat (healthy, and a biased pick)

I think Lebron's Heat teams should be in the conversation. They were extremely defensively versatile and would give other top teams some issues. Only problem could be if they ran into a great center.

[SamuraiSWISH]

96 Bulls
86 Celtics
97 Bulls
92 Bulls
01 Lakers

HM

08 Celtics
09 Lakers
13 Heat
15 Warriors

[TommyGriffin]

96 Bulls
86 Celtics
97 Bulls
92 Bulls
01 Lakers

HM

08 Celtics
09 Lakers
13 Heat
15 Warriors
15 Warriors better than the 16 Warriors? I smell an agenda here.

[Round Mound]

86 Celtics
87 Lakers
96 Bulls
89 Pistons
83 Sixers

[Gotterdammerung]

Naturally, I'd rank the 1967 Sixers as the greatest NBA team of all time. But given the OP, I'd go with the following:

1. 1996 Chicago Bulls
2. 1972 Los Angeles Lakers
3. 1986 Boston Celtics
4. 1987 Los Angeles Lakers
5. 1983 Philadelphia Sixers/1989 Detroit Pistons

[WayOfWad3]

I think Lebron's Heat teams should be in the conversation. They were extremely defensively versatile and would give other top teams some issues. Only problem could be if they ran into a great center.
That would be the issue. The main problem with the Heat though is that in 2012 they were weak in the Regular season and dominant in the finals whereas 2013 was the reverse, they never got the best of both worlds.
And a little off-topic, but 2014 LeBron was the most dominant regular season LeBron I have ever seen

[WayOfWad3]

Naturally, I'd rank the 1967 Sixers as the greatest NBA team of all time. But given the OP, I'd go with the following:

1. 1996 Chicago Bulls
2. 1972 Los Angeles Lakers
3. 1986 Boston Celtics
4. 1987 Los Angeles Lakers
5. 1983 Philadelphia Sixers/1989 Detroit Pistons
I see you appreciate/lean toward the older teams a bit, which I understand completely. The 72' Lakers confuse me though, those guys were all old and way past their prime. They did have a dominant regular season, but I wouldn't bet on them beating most other title teams even from just the 80's

[SamuraiSWISH]

15 Warriors better than the 16 Warriors? I smell an agenda here.
Did 2016 win a ring yet? I need to see where they finish. If they win then they move to number 4 on my list.

[TonyMontana]

The only post 1990 team that should be included is the 01 Lakers because of just how dominant their playoff run was along with two of the best players of all-time in the VERY prime of their career. You can argue 2001 Shaq and Kobe were their peak.

Other than that team the league is watered down in comparison to the 80s. Look at the Utah Jazz who only got to the Finals in 1997 despite having Malone/Stockton past their prime as well as shittier role players in comparison to their 80s and early 90s teams.

86 Celtics, 83 Sixers, put a Magic/Kareem Lakers team in there, perhaps a Wilt/Jerry West Lakers team(72?), maybe a bad boys piston team. That's really it. These teams literally had allstars across the whole lineups. It was a time before overexpansion.

[Gotterdammerung]

I see you appreciate/lean toward the older teams a bit, which I understand completely. The 72' Lakers confuse me though, those guys were all old and way past their prime. They did have a dominant regular season, but I wouldn't bet on them beating most other title teams even from just the 80's

Aye, I respect the older teams, due to fundamentals of basketball. And the 1972 Lakers were by far the most versatile team ever. They loved to run, despite the prevailing logic at the time (older players). Chamberlain at this point in his career was playing like peak Russell - blocking shots, playing defense, and at 19.2 rebounds per game, he absolutely controlled the boards, and fired accurate outlet passes to guys like West and Goodrich, who were lethal on the fastbreak. If the pace slowed down to a playoff crawl, they could switch to halfcourt and run the offense through Chamberlain, who was still effective from either the low post or the high post (15 ppg at 65 FG%). They could go small with Happy, (6' 7" 225 power forward) or go big with McMillian in the backcourt. The lineup was stocked with scorers, defenders.

The Lakers had superior team speed and as good or stronger bench than the majority of championship teams in the 70s and the 80s, and Coach Sharman was a perfectionist. In fact, their domination of the 71 Bucks, a great team in its own right, was quite telling. :bowdown:

[plowking]

2016 Warriors
2016 Cavs
2016 Thunder
2016 Spurs
2015 Warriors

[Helix]

Aye, I respect the older teams, due to fundamentals of basketball. And the 1972 Lakers were by far the most versatile team ever. They loved to run, despite the prevailing logic at the time (older players). Chamberlain at this point in his career was playing like peak Russell - blocking shots, playing defense, and at 19.2 rebounds per game, he absolutely controlled the boards, and fired accurate outlet passes to guys like West and Goodrich, who were lethal on the fastbreak. If the pace slowed down to a playoff crawl, they could switch to halfcourt and run the offense through Chamberlain, who was still effective from either the low post or the high post (15 ppg at 65 FG%). They could go small with Happy, (6' 7" 225 power forward) or go big with McMillian in the backcourt. The lineup was stocked with scorers, defenders.

The Lakers had superior team speed and as good or stronger bench than the majority of championship teams in the 70s and the 80s, and Coach Sharman was a perfectionist. In fact, their domination of the 71 Bucks, a great team in its own right, was quite telling. :bowdown:


Couldn't agree more! Also quite telling was winning 33 games in a row.

'86 Celtics
'72 Lakers
'87 Lakers
'83 Sixers
'96 Bulls

With 1970 as a cut off, that leaves out the one team I've seen that I think could have beat the '86 Celtics in a seven game series.......the '67 Sixers. They would be at the top of my list with the '86 Celtics.

[IGOTGAME]

2016 Warriors
2016 Cavs
2016 Thunder
2016 Spurs
2015 Warriors

:roll: :roll:

[NBAGOAT]

2016 Warriors
2016 Cavs
2016 Thunder
2016 Spurs
2015 Warriors

:biggums: damn man. You don't think the 14 Spurs are better than any of these teams :D

[LAZERUSS]

I see you appreciate/lean toward the older teams a bit, which I understand completely. The 72' Lakers confuse me though, those guys were all old and way past their prime. They did have a dominant regular season, but I wouldn't bet on them beating most other title teams even from just the 80's

West and Goodrich were good enough to post 26 ppg seasons. True, West fell apart in the playoffs, but that gives you a better idea of just how strong that team was. They could overcome his awful shooting, and still waltz to a title.

Hairston was in his prime, and he and Chamberlain both pulled down over 1000 rebounds. McMillian was in his second season, and was a good enough offensive player to hang a 42 point game against the reigning champion Bucks in the WCF's.

Then there was Wilt. Led the league in rpg, and by a solid margin. Led the league in FG%, again, by a sizeable margin. Was voted first team all-defense (over players like Thurmond, Cowens, Hayes, Lanier, and a peak Kareem.) How good was his defense? He held a peak Kareem, who had shot .574 against the league in the regular season, to a .457 FG% in the WCF's, which included .414 over the last four pivotal games of the WCF's. He also averaged 8.7 bpg in the known four games of that six game series, including some 13 of Kareem's. And then he averaged 7.4 bpg against the Knicks in the Finals.

BTW, this "old" Laker team just ran the NBA to death in '72. They averaged 121 ppg, which was 11 ppg higher than the league average, and 5 ppg more than the next best team.

Furthermore, they dominated the NBA quite possibly more than any other great team dominated their's. If you include the post-season, they went 7-1 against the 57-25 Bulls; 5-1 against the 51-31 Warriors; 4-2 against the 49-33 Suns; 5-1 against the 47-35 Sonics; 4-1 against the 56-26 Celtics; 8-2 against the 48-34 Knicks; and 8-3 against Kareem's 63-18 Bucks. And they had at least one rout of every team that they faced that year.

[feyki]

96 Bulls/16 Warriors
16 Warriors/96 Bulls
72 LA
86 Celtics
01 LA/71 Bucks

..

I think Warriors have got some problems about durability and health when forcing 73 wins . This playoffs could be wrong on measure them .

[Psileas]

West and Goodrich were good enough to post 26 ppg seasons. True, West fell apart in the playoffs, but that gives you a better idea of just how strong that team was. They could overcome his awful shooting, and still waltz to a title.

Hairston was in his prime, and he and Chamberlain both pulled down over 1000 rebounds. McMillian was in his second season, and was a good enough offensive player to hang a 42 point game against the reigning champion Bucks in the WCF's.

Then there was Wilt. Led the league in rpg, and by a solid margin. Led the league in FG%, again, by a sizeable margin. Was voted first team all-defense (over players like Thurmond, Cowens, Hayes, Lanier, and a peak Kareem.) How good was his defense? He held a peak Kareem, who had shot .574 against the league in the regular season, to a .457 FG% in the WCF's, which included .414 over the last four pivotal games of the WCF's. He also averaged 8.7 bpg in the known four games of that six game series, including some 13 of Kareem's. And then he averaged 7.4 bpg against the Knicks in the Finals.

BTW, this "old" Laker team just ran the NBA to death in '72. They averaged 121 ppg, which was 11 ppg higher than the league average, and 5 ppg more than the next best team.

Furthermore, they dominated the NBA quite possibly more than any other great team dominated their's. If you include the post-season, they went 7-1 against the 57-25 Bulls; 5-1 against the 51-31 Warriors; 4-2 against the 49-33 Suns; 5-1 against the 47-35 Sonics; 4-1 against the 56-26 Celtics; 8-2 against the 48-34 Knicks; and 8-3 against Kareem's 63-18 Bucks. And they had at least one rout of every team that they faced that year.

Although I think this figure comes from another poster (posting at RealGm now), I still wonder how he got to this figure, since the only widely available unofficial figure includes only his Game 5 total. Was this a figure extracted by some obscure newspaper clip with no other info available?

[NBAGOAT]

will leave the Warriors out for now since they haven't won yet.

96 Bulls
86 Celtics
87 Lakers
83 Sixers
01 Lakers

Not counting other versions of a similar core(even if 92 Bulls and 96 Bulls are different) or there be a lot of Bulls, Celtics, and Showtime up there.

[LAZERUSS]

Although I think this figure comes from another poster (posting at RealGm now), I still wonder how he got to this figure, since the only widely available unofficial figure includes only his Game 5 total. Was this a figure extracted by some obscure newspaper clip with no other info available?

You are correct...it was from ThaRegul8r.

Game five is interesting. Some sources have him with 10 blocks, while footage seems to have him with 8. Of course, he also had at least one very questionable goal-tend, too. Then there was game four, in which he broke his wrist, and despite playing with 5 fouls...he had two blocks on Jerry Lucas in the OT.

BTW, both you and I have both mentioned this before, but Chamberlain's athleticism in that game five of the '72 Finals was just miles better than his athleticism in game seven of the '70 Finals. Of course, in the '70 Finals, he was only four months removed from major knee surgery. Which speaks volumes about just how good a healthy Wilt might have been in that series. As it was, he still managed a 23-24 .625 series.

[Terahite]

GOAT Walton's '16 Warriors should be on everyone's list. :bowdown:

[Psileas]

You are correct...it was from ThaRegul8r.

Game five is interesting. Some sources have him with 10 blocks, while footage seems to have him with 8. Of course, he also had at least one very questionable goal-tend, too. Then there was game four, in which he broke his wrist, and despite playing with 5 fouls...he had two blocks on Jerry Lucas in the OT.

BTW, both you and I have both mentioned this before, but Chamberlain's athleticism in that game five of the '72 Finals was just miles better than his athleticism in game seven of the '70 Finals. Of course, in the '70 Finals, he was only four months removed from major knee surgery. Which speaks volumes about just how good a healthy Wilt might have been in that series. As it was, he still managed a 23-24 .625 series.

I think a couple of minutes from the 4th quarter are missing from that game footage. Given that, defensively, Wilt was on fire those minutes, he may have had 1-2 blocks more that he didn't get to see.

For obvious reasons, 1970 Wilt was the least athletic version of Wilt. He was still as strong as ever, but not nearly as fast, agile and springy (I've seen a play of him easily losing a jump ball to an uninjured Reed, which I'm sure a healthy Wilt wouldn't). It's still impressive that he still led his team to a 1-3 deficit rebound, followed by a sweep without home court advantage.
A healthy Wilt, on scoring mode, was giving Reed 30+ or even 40+ on any given night whenever Reed played at the 5.

[plowking]

:biggums: damn man. You don't think the 14 Spurs are better than any of these teams :D

Just below 2016 Raptors.

[LAZERUSS]

I think a couple of minutes from the 4th quarter are missing from that game footage. Given that, defensively, Wilt was on fire those minutes, he may have had 1-2 blocks more that he didn't get to see.

For obvious reasons, 1970 Wilt was the least athletic version of Wilt. He was still as strong as ever, but not nearly as fast, agile and springy (I've seen a play of him easily losing a jump ball to an uninjured Reed, which I'm sure a healthy Wilt wouldn't). It's still impressive that he still led his team to a 1-3 deficit rebound, followed by a sweep without home court advantage.
A healthy Wilt, on scoring mode, was giving Reed 30+ or even 40+ on any given night whenever Reed played at the 5.

Chamberlain's '70 post season was truly remarkable. I won't take the time to find it now, but there was a newspaper clip in which Wilt stated that he came back from that surgery, way ahead of schedule, and at considerably less than 100%, just to help his teammates in the playoffs.

And looking at his footage in the Finals, in which he was running very stiff-legged, and with no spring...I found it amazing that in the last three games of the first round against Phoenix, he had 10, 11, and 10 blocked shots. To go along with games of 36, 12, and 30 points, as well as 14, 26, and 27 rebounds. And, as always, he was a force in the must win game seven...with that 30-27-6-11 stat-line.

As for his H2H's with Reed...yes, he OWNED Willis prior to that injury. In fact, in the season before that injury, he battled Reed in two H2H's, and just killed him in every facet of the game (I won't bother looking them up, but he massively outscored, ourebounded, and outshot him.) And a prime Wilt was routinely hanging 40, and even 50+ point games on Reed.


We have discussed it before, but Wilt's 69-70 season will always be a big "what-if?" His new coach asked him to become a scorer again, and he responded by leading the league in scoring in his first nine games, at 32.2 ppg (to go along with 20.6 rpg, and on a .579 FG%.) And he was having a huge game in that ninth game (33 points on 13-14 shooting, in 28 minutes) when he went down with that leg injury. Who knows, but I have estimated that had he played 45 minutes in that ninth game, he likely would have scored 50 points...which would have pushed up his season average to 34.0 ppg. He was well on his way to a staggering season...and all at age 33.