Shaq says his Lakers would have beaten Jordan's Bulls, who you got

[LukeWalton]

Shaq says his Lakers team (the FroBe era)

could beat Jordan's Bulls (which ever 3-peat era you want)

who you got fam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2j8ZRgTmUss

[Roundball_Rock]

Those Lakers teams barely beat a Portland team with an old Pippen and the Kings. Yet they would beat the 90's Bulls with a prime Pippen and MJ and the rest?

[Turbo Slayer]

Bulls in 5 or 6.

[Axe]

In both 3-peats of the bulls, they had better record each season than the lone 3-peat of the lakers. However, the '01 lakers used to have a distinction of having the best postseason record 15-1 until the '17 dubs broke it with one more win.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The 2001 Lakers beat the '98 Bulls imo. The only version of 'Championship Chicago' I see losing though.

[tpols]

why not?

One of MJ's biggest adversaries was the New York Knicks. They featured pat ewing, who is a slightly poor mans version of shaq (perhaps more than that), and jonathan starks... who was a literal homeless man version of kobe. Throw in a little robert horry, rick fox, fisher...

How is Jordan winning?

This aint malone and stockton.

[ShawkFactory]

why not?

One of MJ's biggest adversaries was the New York Knicks. They featured pat ewing, who is a slightly poor mans version of shaq (perhaps more than that), and jonathan starks... who was a literal homeless man version of kobe. Throw in a little robert horry, rick fox, fisher...

How is Jordan winning?

This aint malone and stockton.
Ehhhhhh.

That's kinda like saying Paul Pierce is a slightly poor mans Kobe...and perhaps more than that.

[MrFonzworth]

why not?

One of MJ's biggest adversaries was the New York Knicks. They featured pat ewing, who is a slightly poor mans version of shaq (perhaps more than that), and jonathan starks... who was a literal homeless man version of kobe. Throw in a little robert horry, rick fox, fisher...

How is Jordan winning?

This aint malone and stockton.

I agree. The Bulls never faced a player of the same caliber as Shaq or Kobe. Would be a good one.

[Axe]

Ehhhhhh.

That's kinda like saying Paul Pierce is a slightly poor mans Kobe...and perhaps more than that.
Yet paul pierce has won the title in his first ever finals appearance, a first-time matchup against kobe and his lakers team.

[tpols]

Ehhhhhh.

That's kinda like saying Paul Pierce is a slightly poor mans Kobe...and perhaps more than that.

true, im not trying to diss pat though.

Ultimately, the bulls lost to baby shaq and the orlando magic who were a poor man's squad of the '01 Lakers.

MJ's teams were lucky they didnt run into the top notch C's with similar help as he had.

Everybody always wonders how hakeem and a comparable option to pippen would fare. (and many think the latter would win)

[bison]

This is a good question. My first instinct is to go with Lakers because Shaq would have assuredly dominated this series. But then people brought up how those Laker teams struggled against deep high IQ teams during their 3peat run. Plus the Lakers would have no answer for Pippen who is a thorn of a second option (unlike the facsimile of a leader he was with the blazers). I’m still taking the Lakers.

[bison]

The closest we got to this hypothetical fantasy matchup was on February 1st 1998. Bulls had jordan, Pippen, longley, Rodman, and Harper. The complete Bulls 98 roster.

The Lakers had Shaq, Kobe, fisher, Fox and Horry. This is essentially the core of the Lakers first 3peat dynasty.

Rodman and Pippen had a mediocre game that night(by their standards) while veterans Eddie Jones and Rick Fox were riding a hot streaky stretch of the mid season and put in like 24 each. Jordan torched Kobe on several occasions and had the game high, but Kobe put in 20 off the bench and had some daggers in the fourth. Lakers blew out the bulls on that night. The bulls blew out the lakers earlier that season but Shaq was out that game.

[Axe]

The closest we got to this hypothetical fantasy matchup was on February 1st 1998. Bulls had jordan, Pippen, longley, Rodman, and Harper. The complete Bulls 98 roster.

The Lakers had Shaq, Kobe, fisher, Fox and Horry. This is essentially the core of the Lakers first 3peat dynasty.

Rodman and Pippen had a mediocre game that night(by their standards) while veterans Eddie Jones and Rick Fox were riding a hot streaky stretch of the mid season and put in like 24 each. Jordan torched Kobe on several occasions and had the game high, but Kobe put in 20 off the bench and had some daggers in the fourth. Lakers blew out the bulls on that night. The bulls blew out the lakers earlier that season but Shaq was out that game.
Two years later, hof coach phil jackson would lead the same lakers team to a championship, after doing so in the last title run of the bulls dynasty.

[DoctorP]

Shaq's a clown.

[Stephonit]

The Bulls did beat the Orlando Magic with Shaq during the rematch when Jordan was fully back. Then you have to weigh Hardaway and Kobe. Then the rest of the crew.

[Mr Feeny]

He got swept by the Bulls when he was 24 and when Penny was ag his absolute peak with a ts% of 60+ and a PER of 24.1.

They got ragdolled by Utah and swept in 98 ao we didnt get to see whow the 4 all star Lakers would have done against the worst version of the Bulls in 1998. The rest is a hypothetical. But the Bulls swept Shaq, as he remembers.

[John Connor]

The 2001 Lakers would without question put up a strong series against the 96 Bulls, perhaps beating them.

It would really depend on Rodman's ability to get into Shaq's head or not... that's basically what the series would come down to.

To be clear, the Bulls would probably still win... Rodman, Pippen and MJ is maybe the best set of three defensive players on one team ever...

I do think 2001 Shaq would shit on Dennis Rodman compared to what he did in the 1996 Bulls Magic series.

[Jasper]

Shaq says his Lakers team (the FroBe era)

could beat Jordan's Bulls (which ever 3-peat era you want)

who you got fam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2j8ZRgTmUss

Jordan teams would of killed Shaq's teams.... Shaq was a bully on offense , and they would let him get 50 , but would of won by 20 LMAO

[Akeem34TheDream]

First 3peat Bulls have no shot. But Bulls with Rodman would beat them.

[Rysio]

Bulls just had much better defense and teamwork it would be like playing against 04 pistons with Jordan.

[Mr Feeny]

Jordan teams would of killed Shaq's teams.... Shaq was a bully on offense , and they would let him get 50 , but would of won by 20 LMAO

They wouldn't let him score 50, though. The would swarm him just as the did in 96 which resulted in Shaq looking like a deer in headlights.

They would deny entry passes and have a rotating player front him. Watch game 2 in 96. I lost count of how many times Jordan and Harper gave him fits. He isn't used to being suffocated that way and the Bulls' perimeter defense back then was the most tenacious ever.

[FKAri]

All these Shaq/Kobe Lakers all-time hypotheticals depend on how Shaq is officiated.

[Real Men Wear Green]

why not?

One of MJ's biggest adversaries was the New York Knicks. They featured pat ewing, who is a slightly poor mans version of shaq (perhaps more than that), and jonathan starks... who was a literal homeless man version of kobe. Throw in a little robert horry, rick fox, fisher...

How is Jordan winning?

This aint malone and stockton.
So because MJ's team beat the Knicks they lose to Lakers? There is no logic to this statement. A far better comparison would be Shaq's Magic. Penny is far closer to Bryant than Starks and Shaq is Shaq with a number of talented players in the supporting cast. Wouldn't help your argument though... when the Bulls faced them with Rodman they got swept if my memory serves me.

[Phoenix]

I agree. The Bulls never faced a player of the same caliber as Shaq or Kobe. Would be a good one.

Shaq and Kobe never faced a player as good as MJ, nor a team as good as the Bulls, during their run. That logic goes both ways. How well the Bulls contain Shaq would factor in. Kobe is neutralized by MJ on the other side so the Lakers dont enjoy the advantage of having Kobe be the 2nd best player on the court like they did in 2001 and 2002.

[Phoenix]

true, im not trying to diss pat though.

Ultimately, the bulls lost to baby shaq and the orlando magic who were a poor man's squad of the '01 Lakers.

MJ's teams were lucky they didnt run into the top notch C's with similar help as he had.

Everybody always wonders how hakeem and a comparable option to pippen would fare. (and many think the latter would win)

They also swept Shaq and Penny the following season. Grant got injured, but that was probably the difference between a sweep and a 5 game series. That 96 Magic squad is really underrated because of getting their asses swept. That team wins championships in a lot of other seasons.

[Rysio]

Shaq and Kobe never faced a player as good as MJ.
How about AI?

[tpols]

He got swept by the Bulls when he was 24 and when Penny was ag his absolute peak with a ts% of 60+ and a PER of 24.1.

They got ragdolled by Utah and swept in 98 ao we didnt get to see whow the 4 all star Lakers would have done against the worst version of the Bulls in 1998. The rest is a hypothetical. But the Bulls swept Shaq, as he remembers.

MDE shaq > mid 90s Shaq.

Not only bigger, but more experienced / conditioned mentally. (as all stars become as they advance in their careers)

'01 Kobe > Penny, who is on a lower paul pierce or ray allen tier nowhere near top 10 all time player.

So that's apples and oranges.

[Real Men Wear Green]

How about AI?

How about no?

[Phoenix]

How about AI?

You're really asking if AI was equal or better than MJ? I need to take a break from this forum, I swear.

[Rysio]

You're really asking if AI was equal or better than MJ? I need to take a break from this forum, I swear.

Very dominant player I don't think he's better but close.

[Phoenix]

Very dominant player I don't think he's better but close.

He's not close either. Jesus H Christ.

[3ball]

why not?






Points above league average ORtg:


2000 Lakers: +3.2
2001 Lakers: +5.4
2002 Lakers: +4.9

2008 Lakers: +5.5
2009 Lakers: +4.5
2010 Lakers: +1.2
______________________
Average: +4.12



1991 Bulls: +6.7
1992 Bulls: +7.3
1993 Bulls: +4.9

1996 Bulls: +7.6
1997 Bulls: +7.7
1998 Bulls: +2.7
______________________
Average: +6.15














One of MJ's biggest adversaries was the New York Knicks. They featured pat ewing, who is a slightly poor mans version of shaq (perhaps more than that), and jonathan starks... Who was s literal homeless version of kobe



Meh, he swept Shaq/Penny (while Penny outplayed Pip)






How is Jordan winning?

This ain't Malone Stockton


.
Stockton swept Shaq/Kobe 2 years in a row before MJ beat them both times

That said, I do think the 01' Lakers could've beaten the Bulls

[red1]

I'm going shaq and kobe 2001 lakers over any version of the bulls.


you have the best center of all-time and the best shooting guard of all-time not named mike and the closest thing - and Im sorry but the bulls wont have any answer for the big diesel


you can ignore the rest of these bums all you need is shaq and kobe with fisher horry and rick fox and thats enough to do it.

https://www.latimes.com/includes/projects/img/lakers/season_photos/season_2001_2002.jpg



I'm going lakers in six, on a horry series winning 3-pointer


https://www.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/persons/484951/484951_v9_ba.jpg

[red1]

Shaq's a clown.

dr shaquille is absolutely right. not sure what you mean?

[Axe]

They wouldn't let him score 50, though. The would swarm him just as the did in 96 which resulted in Shaq looking like a deer in headlights.

They would deny entry passes and have a rotating player front him. Watch game 2 in 96. I lost count of how many times Jordan and Harper gave him fits. He isn't used to being suffocated that way and the Bulls' perimeter defense back then was the most tenacious ever.
Swarming shaq in the low post sounds like a total gangbang.

That's just what the spurs did to him with their twin tower duo duncan and robinson en route to their maiden championship season in 1999.

[tpols]

Stockton swept Shaq/Kobe 2 years in a row before MJ beat them both times


He swept the 90s versions of shaq and kobe.

Of which, shaq wasn't quite close to what he'd be at MDE, and Kobe nowhere close to what he'd become.

Nice troll.

[red1]

Swarming shaq in the low post sounds like a total gangbang.

That's just what the spurs did to him with their twin tower duo duncan and robinson en route to their maiden championship season in 1999.

you want horry kobe and fisher taking open shots? :oldlol:

[sdot_thadon]

I think it could go either way. I'll say Bulls gun to my head, 96 version to be specific, but i can't rule out the Lakers being able to win. How much better do we think Shaq got from 1996 to 2000-2002? How well could we expect young Kobe to do vs. Mj and Scottie(Harper) defending him? I think both teams had a great set of roles players, but I also think 3peat Shaq was a better player than the one the Bulls took out in 96. Young Kobe would be chomping at the bit to duel with Mj at such high stakes, he could actually have an all time great showing or just as easily shoot them out of the series, I'd lean more towards him having a great series despite facing elite defense because he'd still have the luxury of the Bulls defense already being on red alert with Shaq down low. Mj would probably be pushed in a way he hadn't been in his other finals and maybe would have one of his best. Scottie would have his hands FULL with Kobe and Rodman in the same boat with Shaq. If I could see an alltime matchup this is always one of the 1st that comes to mind.

[Gougou]

96 Bulls would win, 96 Bulls bench is better, and the defense as an entire team is better aswell. Rodman will play his hardest to contain Shaq.

[ronniec]

Jordan > Kobe (Prime Jordan was better than Kobe, no matter what)
Pippen > Fox (too obvious)
Shaq > Rodman/Luc, but will be a hard fought match. Shaq was less dangerous when shooting FT.
Kukoc > Horry (Horry was clutch but Kukoc was a more complete player and contributed more in more minutes)
Harper and Kerr probably even out Fish and Shaw

Yes, basketball is a team sport and Bulls was great in both ISO and triangle. Lakers did not have a better defense than the Bulls.
Bulls would win in 6

[ShawkFactory]

The bulls can throw both Jordan and Pippen at Kobe.

I mean Jordan could probably win that matchup alone...

And I feel like the bulls could at least make life difficult for Shaq underneath.

Then there’s kukoc. He’d average 25/10 today.

[houston]

I think 2000 and 2001 Lakers can beat any second 3 peat Bulls team.

[SamuraiSWISH]

I agree. The Bulls never faced a player of the same caliber as Shaq or Kobe. Would be a good one.
Besides the fact they LITERALLY faced Shaq

[Mamba4Life]

lakers would win

kobe/mj cancel each other out, and shaq >> pippen + rodman

infact, it wouldnt surprise me to see kobe outplaying mj, kobe could shoot the 3 and get his teammates involved, mj would be flustered as f*ck guarding a younger, better version of himself.

[Smoke117]

Shaq is a perfect representation of how ****ing stupid people are. This goof has been making millions upon millions off his persona...that is just god awfully juvenile and pathetic. He's a perfect example of god damn ****ing stupid every other person is tha they find this half retarded silverback ape amusing...ugh.

[Mr Feeny]

They also swept Shaq and Penny the following season. Grant got injured, but that was probably the difference between a sweep and a 5 game series. That 96 Magic squad is really underrated because of getting their asses swept. That team wins championships in a lot of other seasons.

The Bulls were spanking them before Grant got injured. In fact, I thik grant had something like 0,0, and 0 in the minutes Rodman played him.

Chicago completely shut him down and Shaq couldn't get anything going.

Penny of 1996 was better than 2000 Kobe in almost every way. A better playmaker. A much more efficient scorer. And they still got swept.

I don't even see an argument for the Lakers because the Bulls already played prime Shaq, and swept him. So this isn't as much of a hypothetical as it is with other dream matchups.

[Mr Feeny]

Swarming shaq in the low post sounds like a total gangbang.

That's just what the spurs did to him with their twin tower duo duncan and robinson en route to their maiden championship season in 1999.

Yes in 1999. Another sweep. He isn't comfortable when teams collapse. You would need spacing and while it is technically there, the supporting cast sometimes doesn't play well when the stakes are high.

Incidentally, that's what the 98 Jazz did as well. Ostertag was matched up against him but several would collapse on him and Shaq looked befuddled.

[Axe]

Yes in 1999. Another sweep. He isn't comfortable when teams collapse. You would need spacing and while it is technically there, the supporting cast sometimes doesn't play well when the stakes are high.

Incidentally, that's what the 98 Jazz did as well. Ostertag was matched up against him but several would collapse on him and Shaq looked befuddled.
That lakers team weren't able to push through back then until phil came there in 1999.

[Mr Feeny]

That lakers team weren't able to push through back then until phil came there in 1999.

And that is why the triangle made a difference. Instead of running the exact same play time and time again and giving to Shaq deep after which opposition teams collapsed, the triakngr9 atleast have some of the supporting cast some open looks.

Having said that, I remember Jerry West criticising Horry, Kobe, and Fisher after the 98 sweep at the hands of the Jazz. They all had several open looks and kept feeding Shaq who was doubled. The games were relatively close but they just didnt execute down the stretch and West remarked that these players are there to make open shots when Shaq was doubled and that if they couldnt do that, the Lakers had no chance of winning.

[Axe]

And that is why the triangle made a difference. Instead of running the exact same play time and time again and giving to Shaq deep after which opposition teams collapsed, the triakngr9 atleast have some of the supporting cast some open looks.

Having said that, I remember Jerry West criticising Horry, Kobe, and Fisher after the 98 sweep at the hands of the Jazz. They all had several open looks and kept feeding Shaq who was doubled. The games were relatively close but they just didnt execute down the stretch and West remarked that these players are there to make open shots when Shaq was doubled and that if they couldnt do that, the Lakers had no chance of winning.
Yeah, good point. And shaq was the perfect man to act as the focal point since he used to be so dominant during those days.

[Soundwave]

I mean the 2001 Lakers were good but were they really than much better than the '96 Magic? Penny Hardaway was a really good player too, it's not like he was dirt he'd be fairly comparable to a 2000 or 2001 Kobe.

[tanibanana]

All Shaq needed is Penny

[Axe]

All Shaq needed is Penny
He needs him to be swept in the finals.

[NBAGOAT]

i picked bulls but slightly interesting just because the bulls dont have the coaching advantage like they did vs most teams. lot of weight is going be on shaq's shoulders however as it's pretty doubtful young kobe outplays jordan and the Bulls have better pieces and depth.

[3ball]

He swept the 90s versions of shaq and kobe.

Of which, shaq wasn't quite close to what he'd be at MDE, and Kobe nowhere close to what he'd become.

Nice troll.
Bulls were much better on both ends of the floor

Far bigger margins above league average ortg and below drtg

That means bulls win and pretty easily most years

I do believe the 01' Lakers could win 1 in 3 Finals vs Bulls.. that Bron winning percentage lol

[3ball]

i picked bulls but slightly interesting just because the bulls dont have the coaching advantage like they did vs most teams. lot of weight is going be on shaq's shoulders however as it's pretty doubtful young kobe outplays jordan and the Bulls have better pieces and depth.
Bulls were top heavy and everyone else was replaceable - literally - MJ and Pippen were the only hold-overs from the 1st three-peat

Lakers had Horry, Fox, Fisher, Glen Rice - these guys hit like 1000 more big shots than the bulls

That's pretty good bench and matches the stiffs the Bulls had... Only Kukoc was viable.. Kerr was a product of goat systems like triangle or Pop...

[LAL]

Bulls were top heavy and everyone else was replaceable - literally - MJ and Pippen were the only hold-overs from the 1st three-peat

Lakers had Horry, Fox, Fisher, Glen Rice - these guys hit like 1000 more big shots than the bulls

That's pretty good bench and matches the stiffs the Bulls had... Only Kukoc was viable.. Kerr was a product of goat systems like triangle or Pop...

No, Lakes were as top heavy as the bulls were. Mentioning Fisher and Fox and then say Kerr was a product of goat system? Shaq and Kobe were carrying serious bums too, only 2000 did they have Glenn rice.. like bulls had Kukoc, or rodman or horace grant.

[NBAGOAT]

Bulls were top heavy and everyone else was replaceable - literally - MJ and Pippen were the only hold-overs from the 1st three-peat

Lakers had Horry, Fox, Fisher, Glen Rice - these guys hit like 1000 more big shots than the bulls

That's pretty good bench and matches the stiffs the Bulls had... Only Kukoc was viable.. Kerr was a product of goat systems like triangle or Pop...

Glen rice wasn’t on the 01 team. I have no idea how Ron Harper is anymore a product of the triangle than Fisher. Kukoc is very viable when you consider the Lakers don’t even have a true 3rd option

[JBSptfn]

I mean the 2001 Lakers were good but were they really than much better than the '96 Magic? Penny Hardaway was a really good player too, it's not like he was dirt he'd be fairly comparable to a 2000 or 2001 Kobe.

Yeah, and Orlando's 3-5 players (Grant, Anderson, Scott) are better than what the Lakers had. From what I see online, the 01 Lakers are the most overrated team ever. They just had Shaq, Kobe, and a collection of stiffs.

[BarberSchool]

If they play 49 games over a three month period.

The bulls win 35 games, Lakers win 14.

Its not as close as people think.

Longley was pretty much as big as Shaq and has 6 fouls.
Wennington’s legs were almost as strong as shaq’s (which is how post position is gained) and he has 6 fouls. Rodman is gonna play with shaq’s bootyhole and he has 6 fouls.

Lakers gonna be watching Shaq brick FT all night, every night.

[ArbitraryWater]

Yeah, good point. And shaq was the perfect man to act as the focal point since he used to be so dominant during those days.

duh

[Phoenix]

Yeah, and Orlando's 3-5 players (Grant, Anderson, Scott) are better than what the Lakers had. From what I see online, the 01 Lakers are the most overrated team ever. They just had Shaq, Kobe, and a collection of stiffs.

The Lakers were more top heavy with Shaq/Kobe accounting for 58% of the offense. The Magic had a more balanced attack with 5 players doing double digits. 3D and Nick Anderson were good for the occasional 20 point night and Horace was putting up the numbers he was dropping during the Bulls 3peat. There is a bit of drop off from 2001 Shaq/Kobe to 96 Shaq/Penny but as you said, players 3 to 5 are definitely better on the Magic. Orlando won 60 games with Shaq missing 28. They were a hell of a squad.

[Indian guy]

The Lakers were more top heavy with Shaq/Kobe accounting for 58% of the offense. The Magic had a more balanced attack with 5 players doing double digits. 3D and Nick Anderson were good for the occasional 20 point night and Horace was putting up the numbers he was dropping during the Bulls 3peat. There is a bit of drop off from 2001 Shaq/Kobe to 96 Shaq/Penny but as you said, players 3 to 5 are definitely better on the Magic. Orlando won 60 games with Shaq missing 28. They were a hell of a squad.

Horace Grant hurt himself in Game 1 of the '96 ECF. Didn't play the rest of the series.

Comparing '96 Magic to '01 Lakers to me is like comparing '98 Lakers to the '01 Lakers. Yeah, the former has more overall talent, but nowhere close to the maturity, toughness, leadership, coaching necessary to be a champion. Orlando's meek surrender in '95 and '96 made it pretty obvious they were frauds. '01 Lakers would humiliate '96 Magic in a 7 game series. Just like Bulls beating them in '96 would be in no way similar to facing a battle-tested '01 Laker team in a playoff series. I'm actually with Shaq. I don't think any version of Chicago beats that team.

[LAL]

Horace Grant hurt himself in Game 1 of the '96 ECF. Didn't play the rest of the series.

Comparing '96 Magic to '01 Lakers to me is like comparing '98 Lakers to the '01 Lakers. Yeah, the former has more overall talent, but nowhere close to the maturity, toughness, leadership, coaching necessary to be a champion. Orlando's meek surrender in '95 and '96 made it pretty obvious they were frauds. '01 Lakers would humiliate '96 Magic in a 7 game series. Just like Bulls beating them in '96 would be in no way similar to facing a battle-tested '01 Laker team in a playoff series. I'm actually with Shaq. I don't think any version of Chicago beats that team.

No mention of Kobe & Shaq duo in their prime. They would've carried anyone in the world to rings.

[Indian guy]

No mention of Kobe & Shaq duo in their prime. They would've carried anyone in the world to rings.

Yeah, '01 Shaq/Kobe is undoubtedly the GOAT duo. Far superior to '96 Shaq/Penny or even '96 MJ/Pippen. You pretty much put any cast around them with Phil on the sidelines and they would win in almost any era (17-19 GSW excluded).

[Phoenix]

Horace Grant hurt himself in Game 1 of the '96 ECF. Didn't play the rest of the series.

Comparing '96 Magic to '01 Lakers to me is like comparing '98 Lakers to the '01 Lakers. Yeah, the former has more overall talent, but nowhere close to the maturity, toughness, leadership, coaching necessary to be a champion. Orlando's meek surrender in '95 and '96 made it pretty obvious they were frauds. '01 Lakers would humiliate '96 Magic in a 7 game series. Just like Bulls beating them in '96 would be in no way similar to facing a battle-tested '01 Laker team in a playoff series. I'm actually with Shaq. I don't think any version of Chicago beats that team.

I meant Horace dropping numbers in terms of what he did during the year. As far as the series in question, him being injured has already been acknowledged and in reality, him playing the entire series probably spots the Magic a game. Rodman would have neutralized him so I'm not sure why his injury gets thrown out there as if that was the difference between the Bulls winning and losing. In game one he actually played 28 minutes and did a 0/0/0 statline so he played enough of game 1 and was completely ineffectual. Now obviously he wouldn't duplicate that kind of 'performance' had he not gotten hurt but I really doubt he makes a dramatic difference and I would say he was the biggest difference the prior year when Orlando beat the Bulls, only there was no Rodman there to check him.

Beyond that, I'm not arguing that the Magic were an equal squad to the 01 Lakers. Shaq was obviously a more mature talent compared to 96. 01 Kobe was better than 96 Penny but I think Penny is holding his own. The Magic did have superior 1-12 talent. No, they didnt have the coaching, poise or toughness of the 01 Lakers but I wasn't inferring otherwise or that Orlando getting swept is an accurate parallel for what would happen if the Bulls met the 01 Lakers.