How many nba titles if Jordan-Pippen Bulls team play in the 1980's??

[Lebron23]

Can they dominate in that era??

[Axe]

You think that they did so well during the bad boys era? Just wondering.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Yes they would dominate that era or any era as long as Phil Jackson is there and Pippen is in his prime. Phil Jackson proved his coaching can win in different era's 1990s and 2000s. As long as you give Phil the best offensive player ever (Jordan) and best defensive player ever (Pippen) i don't see how they are not a dynasty in any era. Jordan and Pippen compliment each other too well and Phil Jackson is too good of a coach.

Kareem was past his prime the entire 1980s besides the very first year and Magic\Bird are clearly inferior to Jordan, Mchale is inferior to Pippen overall.

I can see maybe Boston\Lakers squeezing in 1 or 2 titles but majority of them would go to bulls. Pistons would have 0 because once Pippen hits his prime they are outclassed. I think Pistons 2 rings were kind of a fluke anyway and just a result of Kareem retiring and Scottie not hitting his prime yet.

[Manny98]

They're not dominating shit :facepalm

They would win 2 rings max, the East would be a bloodbath having to go through the Bad Boys and the Celtics every year then having to play the Showtime Lakers in the finals

[GimmeThat]

they would probably win 3 or 4. 3 being a safe bet since 4 franchises won in the 80's. the 4th being how FA/FO pan out, and with the Bulls winning over more than 50% of the 90's decade, I can see it being swung towards their favor.

[Soundwave]

The Pistons won 2 and the Bulls were better than that Pistons so start from there and go up I guess.

Being in the 80s in their peak likely means they'd have an extra good player added to the roster too because expansion diluted the Bulls roster too (something people who use this argument never point out).

[ArbitraryWater]

96-98 doesnt win 86-88

91-93 wins 81 and 82, no chance 83


2 titles

[SouBeachTalents]

Having to go through Sixers/Celtics/Lakers would've been a bloodbath

[nayte]

If both Jordan and pip were drafted by 81 or so . I don’t see why they couldn’t beat those teams while both in their primes

[SATAN]

Clearly if Jordan had prime Pippen throughout the 80s + 90s he would have at least 10 rings. Probably way less propaganda films though.

[Axe]

Clearly if Jordan had prime Pippen throughout the 80s + 90s he would have at least 10 rings. Probably way less propaganda films though.
https://media.giphy.com/media/SXNBcH5yBvqXCbYl3E/giphy.gif

[nayte]

Clearly if Jordan had prime Pippen throughout the 80s + 90s he would have at least 10 rings. Probably way less propaganda films though.

I remember old magic and bird vids. Not like shit now days but maybe more lol

[goozeman]

Without Phil Jackson and Horace Grant? None. 80's was mostly elegant goon squad basketball. The game was played differently. The story of the 80's was Jordan trying to impose his outlandish and brilliant iso style of basketball on game dominated by twin towers high low action. It didn't work until Phil showed up and got Jordan to commit to the team game. It seems that people have this monolithic image of Jordan in light of his success in the 90's. But in the 80's, Jordan was just another guy on the outside looking in. Jordan's scoring prowess never really threatened Celtics team game, not even a little. Pippen wouldn't have changed that. What really completed the Bulls and made them contenders was the combination of Horace Grant, Pippen, and Jordan. Grant actually had a higher WS than Pippen for the playoffs in two of their first three titles. Grant's impact is underestimated, and so is the greatness of Phil Jackson as a coach.

[nayte]

Without the coach and their power forward. Well done a lot of players don’t win without that

[goozeman]

Double dribblin no tippin Pippin could barely go .500 with second easiest schedule in the league without Grant. And basketball genius Jordan lost to him in the playoffs. Guess rebounding and interior defense matters...

[SATAN]

Without Phil Jackson and Horace Grant? None. 80's was mostly elegant goon squad basketball. The game was played differently. The story of the 80's was Jordan trying to impose his outlandish and brilliant iso style of basketball on game dominated by twin towers high low action. It didn't work until Phil showed up and got Jordan to commit to the team game. It seems that people have this monolithic image of Jordan in light of his success in the 90's. But in the 80's, Jordan was just another guy on the outside looking in. Jordan's scoring prowess never really threatened Celtics team game, not even a little.

Great post.

[nayte]

Sorry mate are u saying Horace over Jordan and pip .im not sure but they both needed a power forward defender rebounder . Horace was an intergral part for the bulls like Rodman was

[SATAN]

If me, no. He played a very significant role though.

[Axe]

Without Phil Jackson and Horace Grant? None. 80's was mostly elegant goon squad basketball. The game was played differently. The story of the 80's was Jordan trying to impose his outlandish and brilliant iso style of basketball on game dominated by twin towers high low action. It didn't work until Phil showed up and got Jordan to commit to the team game. It seems that people have this monolithic image of Jordan in light of his success in the 90's. But in the 80's, Jordan was just another guy on the outside looking in. Jordan's scoring prowess never really threatened Celtics team game, not even a little. Pippen wouldn't have changed that. What really completed the Bulls and made them contenders was the combination of Horace Grant, Pippen, and Jordan. Grant actually had a higher WS than Pippen for the playoffs in two of their first three titles. Grant's impact is underestimated, and so is the greatness of Phil Jackson as a coach.
It's kinda creepy seeing such narrative for a newly created dvp.

[ImKobe]

5+ easily. The Pistons were a play away from 3-Peating from 88-90. Lakers/Celtics got upset quite a few times in the Playoffs.

[goozeman]

Sorry mate are u saying Horace over Jordan and pip .im not sure but they both needed a power forward defender rebounder . Horace was an intergral part for the bulls like Rodman was

I'm saying Grant is walking double double and you couldn't beat the Celtics and Pistons of the world at that time without strong defensive and rebounding anchor. They would just smash you on the boards and pound you to death in the paint. Larry Bird was himself almost equal to Jordan as a scorer, and then you add two HoF players in Parish and McHale? It's a mismatch. Pippen by himself is not changing that. Kevin McHale alone is probably one of the scariest players to ever have to face in the playoffs. He is capable of getting 50 in a game. You would need an all-defensive level player at forward/center position to compete, which Grant was. Or Rodman also, if you wish, but then you open up a time continuity problem because there would be two Rodmans in the NBA. I mean I guess if you dropped a fully mature Bulls squad into the middle of the 80's, they would win titles...sure. But the OP said specifically just Pippen. Pippen by himself is not changing anything. They are not beating the Celtics or Detroit without something more.

[goozeman]

It's kinda creepy seeing such narrative for a newly created dvp.

I've been reading this forum for years. Never really inspired to post. No basketball and bored, I guess. Also, some pretty outrageous statements being made on the forum right now I simply couldn't ignore. I mean, normally all trash talk is all good and it is fun, lol, but this Jordan doc (really a propaganda puff piece) has caused some to lose their minds.

[nayte]

I'm saying Grant is walking double double and you couldn't beat the Celtics and Pistons of the world at that time without strong defensive and rebounding anchor. They would just smash you on the boards and pound you to death in the paint. Larry Bird was himself almost equal to Jordan as a scorer, and then you add two HoF players in Parish and McHale? It's a mismatch. Pippen by himself is not changing that. Kevin McHale alone is probably one of the scariest players to ever have to face in the playoffs. He is capable of getting 50 in a game. You would need an all-defensive level player at forward/center position to compete, which Grant was. Or Rodman also, if you wish, but then you open up a time continuity problem because there would be two Rodmans in the NBA. I mean I guess if you dropped a fully mature Bulls squad into the middle of the 80's, they would win titles...sure. But the OP said specifically just Pippen. Pippen by himself is not changing anything. They are not beating the Celtics or Detroit without something more.

Ok I can agree.Do u think if they had prime Rodman instead of Horace it would have been different

[nayte]

It's hard to read no doubt but I think I'm getting his gist

[goozeman]

Ok I can agree.Do u think if they had prime Rodman instead of Horace it would have been different

Rodman would have been even better because he cut his teeth in that brand of basketball (experience) and was himself an all-world defender, but like I said, then you have two Rodmans. Rodman gonna play himself against Detroit? Grant is underrated player though IMHO. A lot of players from that era don't get nearly enough credit.

[nayte]

Rodman would have been even better because he cut his teeth in that brand of basketball (experience) and was himself an all-world defender, but like I said, then you have two Rodmans. Rodman gonna play himself against Detroit? Grant is underrated player though IMHO. A lot of players from that era don't get nearly enough credit.

Ahh yep. I don't think with prime rodman they were beating the Celts either way.No rod on the pistons I would take the bulls from back then

[Roundball_Rock]

Not 6 in an era with other great teams.

[Phoenix]

2-3 depending on which year and which version of the Bulls. I don't think Detroit can beat any version of Chicago from 91 onwards ( maybe the 90 Pistons take out the 98 Bulls). Those 89 and 90 titles are the ones I can most clearly see as ripe for the taking. Those Celtics, Lakers and Sixers squads were tough and not really great matchups for Chicago. 92, 93, 96 and maybe 97 Bulls are probably the best versions to pull what I'd consider an upset over those teams.

[RogueBorg]

Can they dominate in that era??

If they signed Coach Ditka to play center....20 rings


https://www.theringer.com/tv/2018/9/27/17907760/da-bears-saturday-night-live-george-wendt-robert-smigel

[FKAri]

They'd need a better big. 80s were top heavy and those top teams were stacked.

[JBSptfn]

Maybe one, if they're lucky.

[Lebron23]

I'm saying Grant is walking double double and you couldn't beat the Celtics and Pistons of the world at that time without strong defensive and rebounding anchor. They would just smash you on the boards and pound you to death in the paint. Larry Bird was himself almost equal to Jordan as a scorer, and then you add two HoF players in Parish and McHale? It's a mismatch. Pippen by himself is not changing that. Kevin McHale alone is probably one of the scariest players to ever have to face in the playoffs. He is capable of getting 50 in a game. You would need an all-defensive level player at forward/center position to compete, which Grant was. Or Rodman also, if you wish, but then you open up a time continuity problem because there would be two Rodmans in the NBA. I mean I guess if you dropped a fully mature Bulls squad into the middle of the 80's, they would win titles...sure. But the OP said specifically just Pippen. Pippen by himself is not changing anything. They are not beating the Celtics or Detroit without something more.

Goozeman is probably Horace Grant. It won't suprise me if some former, or current nba players are lurking in this forum.

[Lebron23]

I've been reading this forum for years. Never really inspired to post. No basketball and bored, I guess. Also, some pretty outrageous statements being made on the forum right now I simply couldn't ignore. I mean, normally all trash talk is all good and it is fun, lol, but this Jordan doc (really a propaganda puff piece) has caused some to lose their minds.

Very true Mr Grant.

[3ball]

Bulls would be 4/4 in the 80's because..

the 91' bulls would beat any of the bad boys teams - and the bad boys beat the Lakers/Celtics, so the bulls would beat everyone

So the bulls would be 4/4... Because mj would retire after getting a goat 2-peat for the modern era... then he'd return for another.. then he'd get more in the 90's

People don't realize that MJ would've played in 1994 if he had the ultimate re-charger - MOTIVATION (need to prove something)

MJ vanquished everyone and convincingly, just like he did his brother in the backyard.. he probably quit on his brother too after enough butt-whippings

[Duncan21formvp]

They get 6 for sure. 1980 would be like the 1990 squad. 1981 like the 1991 squad. 1982 like the 1992 squad and so on. 1983 they lose with the 1993 squad. 1984 with MJ they would beat Celtics that year and Lakers if adding him to 1994 Squad. 1995 squad they lose to Lakers or Celtics. 1986 squad would be 1996 squad that would be showdown for ages of 1996 Bulls vs 1986 Celtics. Same in 1987 with the Lakers and the 1997 Bulls. Hell the 1998 Bulls vs 1988 Lakers would be a great showdown as well.

[Bronbron23]

Can they dominate in that era??

hard to say. Mj lost to the best 80's teams in the 80's but he was young and didnt have alot of help. Id say 4. I dont think the bad boys beat a prime mj and pip but i coukd see celtics and lakers each taking one.

Lebron on the other hand would maybe win 1. The warriors team he beat in 16 werent anywhere close to those lakers and celtics teams in the 80's and he needed 7 just to beat them. Maybe he gets one if he has that miami squad.

[hateraid]

Milwaukee a sleeper here. Jordan having to be on lock by Moncreif and Robertson would challenging. He had troubles with a Payton Hawkins backcourt, this I'd imagine having to deal with that in his division would be a matchup nightmare.

[Bronbron23]

Milwaukee a sleeper here. Jordan having to be on lock by Moncreif and Robertson would challenging. He had troubles with a Payton Hawkins backcourt, this I'd imagine having to deal with that in his division would be a matchup nightmare.

Didnt rookie mj destroy that bucks team with moncreif and them? 96 mj may have a bit of trouble but pre baseball mj with a prime pip would have no problems with that bucks team

[light]

Can they dominate in that era??

They did play in the 80's. No rings for them.

[Bronbron23]

They did play in the 80's. No rings for them.

Thats like saying lebron couldn't dominate the 2000's

[HoopsNY]

One thing that you have to contextualize here is pre-expansion. So if you have 23 teams instead of 29, then Chicago likely has a go at another great player or quality role player to add to their roster. I'm not saying they would have added Shaq or Kevin Garnett, but who knows? So add a quality player to the roster and the chances are greater.

[Round Mound]

I don´t think they would win if Pippen and Grant aren't both in their primes. I don't think they could even with older Rodman there for them in a 86 Celtics vs 96 Bulls. They surely would not win between 80 through 88. Maybe 89 and 90.

[Turbo Slayer]

The 90s Bulls would be still be perennial contenders and competing in the POs most years.

[goozeman]

Goozeman is probably Horace Grant. It won't suprise me if some former, or current nba players are lurking in this forum.

While I don't doubt there are current and ex-NBA players reading this forum, I'm not one of them, lol. Just a basketball fan. Highest level I played was varsity basketball, started point and sg.

[jayfan]

Without Phil Jackson and Horace Grant? None. 80's was mostly elegant goon squad basketball. The game was played differently. The story of the 80's was Jordan trying to impose his outlandish and brilliant iso style of basketball on game dominated by twin towers high low action. It didn't work until Phil showed up and got Jordan to commit to the team game. It seems that people have this monolithic image of Jordan in light of his success in the 90's. But in the 80's, Jordan was just another guy on the outside looking in. Jordan's scoring prowess never really threatened Celtics team game, not even a little. Pippen wouldn't have changed that. What really completed the Bulls and made them contenders was the combination of Horace Grant, Pippen, and Jordan. Grant actually had a higher WS than Pippen for the playoffs in two of their first three titles. Grant's impact is underestimated, and so is the greatness of Phil Jackson as a coach.


Huh? Who are you referring to?

.

[Turbo Slayer]

While I don't doubt there are current and ex-NBA players reading this forum, I'm not one of them, lol. Just a basketball fan. Highest level I played was varsity basketball, started point and sg. Super cool, dude. Keep it up! :cheers:

[jayfan]

2-3 depending on which year and which version of the Bulls. I don't think Detroit can beat any version of Chicago from 91 onwards ( maybe the 90 Pistons take out the 98 Bulls). Those 89 and 90 titles are the ones I can most clearly see as ripe for the taking. Those Celtics, Lakers and Sixers squads were tough and not really great matchups for Chicago. 92, 93, 96 and maybe 97 Bulls are probably the best versions to pull what I'd consider an upset over those teams.

Pistons were better and deeper in '89 and '88 than they were in '90. The '88 team had Boston beat twice in the ECF before losing. The '89 team beat Boston and had the Lakers beat in the finals before losing. I'd take them over most of the Bulls teams.


.

[goozeman]

Huh? Who are you referring to?

.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48dH3iLmSuE

[Phoenix]

Pistons were better and deeper in '89 and '88 than they were in '90. The '88 team had Boston beat twice in the ECF before losing. The '89 team beat Boston and had the Lakers beat in the finals before losing. I'd take them over most of the Bulls teams.


.

The 89 Bulls were the only team to actually take any games off Detroit that year. Pistons swept everyone else( of course LA had injuries but point remains, Pistons were dominant that year against everyone BUT Chicago). And the Bulls were considerably better in 91 than they were in 89. So I extrapolate from this that at the very least, the first 3peat Bulls were better than Detroit at their best.

[goozeman]

Super cool, dude. Keep it up! :cheers:

:cheers:

[jayfan]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48dH3iLmSuE

Enjoyed the vid, but Wooden's Bruins weren't in the NBA. The Celts used Parish & McHale, but the Pistons played almost no high/low ball and never established the low post. The only "twin towers" I'm aware of were the Hakeem & Sampson Rockets, and they were just a blip on the screen.

[andgar923]

Trolls don’t even try anymore.

The Bulls were taking the Pistons to the limit before they became a great team.

The Bulls were already beating The Lakers with Kareem. MJ was giving the Celtics issues by himself, a great Bulls team def has a chance.

Would they have won 6?

Probably not, but they’re still winning as much as anyone in that era. They had as much of a chance at beating all those teams as anyone.

Those 80s teams never played prime Pip, Grant and championship Bulls just as they never played them.

It’d be one thing if MJ struggled in the 80s but it’s not the case as he was deadly.

[goozeman]

Enjoyed the vid, but Wooden's Bruins weren't in the NBA. The Celts used Parish & McHale, but the Pistons played almost no high/low ball and never established the low post. The only "twin towers" I'm aware of were the Hakeem & Sampson Rockets, and they were just a blip on the screen.

Boston and Houston are obvious examples of "twin towers" offenses, and I was mainly referring to them when I made the statement. Bird would even play high post at times with Parish and McHale both occupying low post positions. Detroit is slightly different because both their guards were their main scorers, but Detroit still played two centers with Mahorn and Laimbeer. In any case, I think the comment is sufficiently obvious. Teams were looking to feed the post and many teams would have lineups with multiple post-up options (the high low is just an example).

[guy]

The obvious scenario here is just moving the Bulls back 10 years. So it’s the 85 Bulls in 1975, 90 Bulls in 1980, 97 Bulls in 1987, etc.

So with that said, they still have a decent chance of winning 6. In 1978, you had 44 and 47 win teams making the finals, so it’s not crazy to assume the 1988 50 win Bulls teams in a tougher era with Jordan playing as dominant as he was couldn’t have started winning titles at that point. The same teams made the finals in 1989 so same thing there. Then what people seem to forget is the early 80s 76ers pre-Moses were nothing special. They were beating the Celtics or losing to them in 7 and they were very competitive against the Lakers, who ended up losing Kareem in the 1980 Finals. The 90-92 Bulls are basically a better version of that team with Jordan literally playing at his apex and Pippen probably being better than anyone on the 76ers other than Dr. J. So from 1978-1982 alone I would say they win 3-5 titles.

Then you have the 83 Sixers vs the 93 Bulls, 86 Celtics vs 96 Bulls, and 87 Lakers vs 97 Bulls. All-time great matchups and maybe the Bulls don’t win them all but they are at least winning 1 of those, and they could still end up winning all of them - the 80s Celtics, 80s Lakers, and Moses 76ers all either lost or almost lost to much worse teams then those Bulls i.e. the 81 Rockets, 83 Bucks, 84 Nets, 84 Knicks, 88 Hawks, 88 Jazz, 88 Mavs . I don’t think the 98 Bulls would win though.