80's vs 90's

[1987_Lakers]

No, they weren't, as indicated by the significant difference in the number of wins and losses, and the quality of these wins and losses.

Its a significant difference in how better teams were in the NBA during the 80's and how watered down the NBA was in the mid 90's. You can't just say 1 team is better than the other because they had a better record.

[72-10]

Its a significant difference in how better teams were in the NBA during the 80's and how watered down the NBA was in the mid 90's. You can't just say 1 team is better than the other because they had a better record.

Nope, it's not as significant as the difference in record and how they performed on the court. There's never been a team that dominated on both offense and defense like the Bulls. It's interesting how all of the facts are in my corner. What you have is some speculation.

[1987_Lakers]

Nope, it's not as significant as the difference in record and how they performed on the court. There's never been a team that dominated on both offense and defense like the Bulls. It's interesting how all of the facts are in my corner. What you have is some speculation.

Well they played in a watered down NBA. While the Celtics played in the greatest era in NBA History. Alot of people don't seem to know that the Celtics had the #1 Defense in the NBA in 1986. The Celtics have more fire power offensivley than the Bulls and they are much better in the paint.

[97 bulls]

Yes, they lost 4-1. But keep in mind this wasn't the 80's lakers we are talking about. No Michael Cooper, No Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, No Pat Riley. You had Magic and Worthy but It just wasn't the same Lakers.
ill give you coop, but this is the center production the lakers got in 87 which i feel was their best team:

jabaar-thompson perkins-divac
pts28 26
rbd12 15
ast4 3
blk2 3

so really the lakers were getting just as much out of their centers in 91 as they were in 87

and i also took the time to look at the 36 minute stats of luc longley and here they are
97 season 13 pts 8 rbd 3ast 2 blks which arent bad and that as a what 4th option. playing against the best collection of centers ever.

[97 bulls]

The Bulls actually lost to the Knicks in '94.

funny, how bout with jordan a full season

[97 bulls]

Nope, it's not as significant as the difference in record and how they performed on the court. There's never been a team that dominated on both offense and defense like the Bulls. It's interesting how all of the facts are in my corner. What you have is some speculation.

its not even speculation but all opinion

[1987_Lakers]

ill give you coop, but this is the center production the lakers got in 87 which i feel was their best team:

jabaar-thompson perkins-divac
pts28 26
rbd12 15
ast4 3
blk2 3

so really the lakers were getting just as much out of their centers in 91 as they were in 87

and i also took the time to look at the 36 minute stats of luc longley and here they are
97 season 13 pts 8 rbd 3ast 2 blks which arent bad and that as a what 4th option. playing against the best collection of centers ever.

Um...Sam Perkins was actually PF for the '91 Lakers so that argument is garbage.

Perkins started played 73 games in '91 and started 66 games as the PF.

[72-10]

Well they played in a watered down NBA. While the Celtics played in the greatest era in NBA History. Alot of people don't seem to know that the Celtics had the #1 Defense in the NBA in 1986. The Celtics have more fire power offensivley than the Bulls and they are much better in the paint.

League wasn't "watered down", it just wasn't quite as good as it was in 1986.

The bold is laughable.:lol

That's great that the Celtics had a great defense, and of course they did. The Bulls are the only team in history that LED THE LEAGUE in both OFFENSE and DEFENSE.

Actual Win-Loss record

86 Boston: 67-15
96 Chicago: 72-10 *NBA record*
(Bulls win)

Expected Win-Loss record

86 Boston: 63-19
96 Chicago: 72-10 *NBA record*
(Bulls win)

Average point differential

86 Boston: 9.4
96 Chicago: 12.3 *NBA record*
(Bulls win)

SRS

86 Boston: 9.06
96 Chicago: 11.80 *second all-time*
(Bulls win)

In case you forgot, the Bulls were actually better than their record. And this analysis fully backs that claim. They lost several games towards the end of the season that they could have easily won had they been pushing for stats.

Now do everyone a favor and shut up.

[1987_Lakers]

League wasn't "watered down", it just wasn't quite as good as it was in 1986.

The bold is laughable.:lol

That's great that the Celtics had a great defense, and of course they did. The Bulls are the only team in history that LED THE LEAGUE in both OFFENSE and DEFENSE.

Actual Win-Loss record

86 Boston: 67-15
96 Chicago: 72-10 *NBA record*

Expected Win-Loss record

86 Boston: 63-19
96 Chicago: 72-10 *NBA record*

Average point differential

86 Boston: 9.4
96 Chicago: 12.3 *NBA record*

SRS

86 Boston: 9.06
96 Chicago: 11.80 *second all-time*

In case you forgot, the Bulls were actually better than their record. And this analysis fully backs that claim. They lost several games towards the end of the season that they could have easily won had they been pushing for stats.

Now do everyone a favor and shut up.

This doesn't mean anything. All it says is the Bulls were more dominant in a weaker NBA.

[72-10]

This doesn't mean anything. All it says is the Bulls were more dominant in a weaker NBA.

Congratulations, you're a dip****. Do you know what SRS rates?:roll:

[1987_Lakers]

Congratulations, you're a dip****. Do you know what SRS rates?:roll:

Does SRS rates proves what team is better?? NO!! All you are doing is looking at stats and records instead of looking at the match ups. And let me tell you those '96 Bulls dont match up well vs that Celtics Front Court Offense.

[72-10]

God you are dumb.:roll:

[97 bulls]

Um...Sam Perkins was actually PF for the '91 Lakers so that argument is garbage.

Perkins started played 73 games in '91 and started 66 games as the PF.
fine add ac greens stats to both teams and thers still not much difference.

[1987_Lakers]

fine add ac greens stats to both teams and thers still not much difference.

That proves the '87 Lakers were better at the Center position than the '91 Lakers.

[1987_Lakers]

God you are dumb.:roll:

stop looking at stats.

[Sir Charles]

Pippen is best known for being a defensive player not offensive and in 93-94 he dropped 22.0 ppg and in the playoffs it was 22.8. Pippen would be an offensive threat from any position and keep in mind if he's playing PG like you say, he is locking down Ainge or Johnson and Pippen was too big and strong for any guard to handle at the offensive or defensive end. Pippen at PG favors the Bulls not the Celtics that is a clear mismatch. The Rockets did very well in the '86 series and they played without their starting point guard. Lastly Magic Johnson reached his prime starting in the 86-87 season. Magic's last 5 seasons were his 5 best seasons, the '86 Lakers were a team in transition.

I agree that Pippen was a Scoring Threat but not a GREAT SCORING THREAT which Bird was:) . Then again Pippen was a Better Man to Man Defender than bird... Bird was a Better Team Defender, Clutch Player, Better Rebounder and Ofcourse better Passer-Assister and Game Creator.

Yes but from the Point Guard Position to score he would have to drive in All the Time Against DJ whom was not as easy to pass as you think:no: . Especially if the Game was a Half Court Slow Pace (whch the Celtics would Force to Make at all Cost). So if he did Drive in and Score when he misses layps or shots then DJ would have oppen lanes to start fast breaks and finish them himself easy as he did many times in the Play-Offs. The Celtics would eventually make them game so..

BACKCOURT:

Pippen plays (PG-SG) and Bird (SG/SF)

Pippen v.s Bird

Bird would constantly Post Up Pippen as he did even in the early 90s. Schooling Him in Scoring, Rebounds and Assits. Pippen would obviously play Great Perimiter Defense but lets remember: this is Bird not in the Late 90s and early 90s but Bird in 84-85 to 86 seasons. A Much Faster Bird with a Back. So Pippen would have to Work even harder than he did to Stop Magic because Bird was a MAJOR SCORING THREAT and WORKED ASOUME OFF THE PICKS. PICKS which would would be Set Up my WALTON and McHALE.

Bird would obviously have a hard time Guarding Pippen one on one because Pip is faster but Bird is known for his "witts". He would just Retreat into a Half Court Slow Paced Game and force Pippen to Shoot. Pip was a Good Shooter but not a Great Shooter and...

We are also talking about Pippen at PG. His role would be to CREATE for his TEAM (which would not have a SCORING THREAT FRONTLINE with GRANT-RODMAN AND A WENNINGTON/LONGLEY etc). Pippen would have to do the following things:

1st CREATE. 2nd DEFEND (BIRD) 3rd-SCORE

Jordan (SG) vs DJ (PG)

Jordan would obviousLy Score his High Scoring Games but DJ in his Prime was not an easy guy to Guard himself. DJ was an asoume Post Player from the Guard Position and Loved Slow Pace Games. Dj wa quite strong and loved to use his butt and make you work your ass of in a Slow Pace Game. Jordan might stop DJ from Scoring alot ofcouse do to his great Defense but he would DEFINETLY NOT STOP DJ from MAKING GREAT PASSES to McHALE in the POST, BIRD of the Pick and Rolls (which Scottie never could stop) and PARISH in the Paint.

Then you had Jordan and Pippen doing BOTH CREATING and SCORING JOBS for the Whole Series. Plus Pippen GUARDING BIRD. This would definetly be a heavy Load for both.

Lets also remember that Ainge would also come in for some parts of the Game and this guy was ONE OF THE MOST UNDERRATED GREAT ROLL PLAYERS EVER AND HE COULD SHOOT and ECAPE REALLY WELL OFF PICK AND ROLLSt. In his Prime we was also a QUITE FAST. Jordan would have to work there to. POST UP against DJ AND RUN Against AINGE.

PIPPEN would eventually have to Rest same part of game so Harper would b the Point Guard and this guy would have more trouble Guarding BIRD than Pippen:) .

Nor Pippen nor Harper would stop a PRIME BIRD from Scoring 25-40, dishing in 5-8 assits and getting 10-15 boards.

If the Bulls put in PAXON or KERR as Combo Guards then they would Loose PASSING ABILITIES, SCORING ABILITIES, HEIGHT PRESENCE, STRENGTH and...

DANNY AINGES, DJs and BIRDS SCORING would be FLYING OUT THE WINDOW:) .

Forget about PAXON and KERR playing

So this means JORDAN AND PIPPEN/HARPER would have to play each alot of Minutes because only Harper would be their Substitute. This would be them playing alog of Minutes. SCORING-DEFENDING and being THE ONLY CREATIVE PLAYERS CAPANLE. But yes with a Frontline with No Talent (with the exception of Kucok). Pippen and Jordan would just better of dont pass in THE POST.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

FRONT COURT(FRONTLINE)

Since the Celtics would use their Big Line Up they would use McHale at the PF, Walton as Center Forward (C-F) in a Twin Tower System (ala Hakeem-Samson, Duncan-Robinson) with Center Parish

You would end up with this:

McHALE (PF) vs RODMAN/GRANT/ KUKOC (PFs-SF)

McHale was 6`10 ft (with a 7.2 footers arm range) tht could score 26 ppg at an Efficiency of 60.4%FG at one time. He would not be stooped in the Post by 6`6 1/2 ft Dennis Rodman nor Grant. McHale was a player whom needed Centers to Guard (even Kareem) him and still they failed from Stoping him :confusedshrug:.

Ofcouse if it was Rodman guadhing Mchale would have a harder time rebounding. Rodman might get in a couple of Offensive Rebounds but not as he usually dominated and he would be in faul troule. He could not stop 6`10 (7`2 ft arm range) McHale from scoring. Rodman and Grant would be flying all over the place with Foul Trouble trying to guard McHale and don`t expect Grant to outrebound McHale in any case. Then again McHale would be stoping Grant or Rodman (who ever played him) from Scoring big time.

If they put on KuKoc. McHale would definetly have a hard time Guarding him do to Speed and talent. Kucok would have to be forced to score from the outside the whole game which is not very efficient for the Bulls. Obviously Mchale would stop Kukoc from scoring in Post and would obviously destroy him in Rebounds.

Then again if Kukoc was guarding McHale. You would have not only a worst Rebounder than Grant-Rodman but also a Very Weak Post Defender. McHale`s s PRIME Scoring Averages and FG% would be flying out the window with this man guarding him. That is the price the Bulls would have to Pay for putting a more Talentd Scoring Kukoc on McHale. Maybe a little more Scoring but NO REBOUNDING and an EASIER TIME FOR MCHALE to SCHOOL IN THE POST.:)

WALTON (CF) v.s WENNINGTON/LONGLEY/GRANT (Cs and PF)

They would certainly Not Out Rebound Walton. Nor Stop him from Scoring. They might be able to tire him off for 30s minutes but he remember Walton is an Ex ALL STAR = Even Past his Prime he could take his GAME TO ANOTHER LEVEL. Something These dudes couldnt :no:. Walton would stop them from scoring, would score on them and out outrebound them

Finally...

PARISH vs WENNINGTON/LONGLEY

Parish in his Prime (still 32 years of age in 86) was a man that could average 15-19 PPG while Scoring at an Efficiency of close to 60% FG. Was a 10-12 RPG man and an absolute Post Up Defensive Stopper. Parish would be too Fast for slow Longley and Wennington and Way More Agressive and Witty than these two.

Parish would Stop them from Scoring, Outrebound them and obviously would Kill them in the Paint Post Up to Score.

Finished.

The Bulls would have to Play A FAST PACE GAME and the CETLICS A SLOW POST UP FRONTCOURT GAME.

At the End the BULLS don`t have the TALENT and BENCH to PLAY LIKE THE 1980s LAKERS FAST PACED STYLE and WIN. So the Bulls would be FORCED TO PLAY CELTICS GAME (SLOW PACE FRONTCOURT POST UP GAME) and THEY WOULD BE FALLING INTO A TRAP

There is absolutely no way the 1996 Bulls would beat a PRIME 1986 CELTICS.

CELTICS 4, BULLS 2 (If that)

There is Enough Proof:violin:

END

[sonicman]

There is absolutely no way the 1996 Bulls would beat a PRIME 1986 CELTICS.

There is Enough Proof:violin:[/B]

The same 1986 Celtics that MJ almost beat single handedly with a 63 point effort in the playoffs?

On a MUCH worse team than he had in '96?

Sure they got sweeped in that series, but MJ had to output crazy numbers to make up for the crap team he had. Didn't that team have like the worst record to make the playoffs? And they gave the 86 Celtics problems? Imagine what the 96 Bulls would do

[nycelt84]

There will never be enough proof all there ever will be are matters of opinion. These teams never faced each other so all anyone can ever do is speculate. A number of points first no team ever ever used a guard to defend Scottie Pippen. It was foolish Pippen was 6'7 too big and strong for any guard to defend. Pippen would drive in against any smaller weaker guard. Kevin McHale was a player prone to foul trouble and Dennis Rodman was the best defensive player of his time. If you don't think Rodman could get in his head look up the '88 Eastern Conference Finals posted on youtube and look at what happened with Bird and McHale. And Rodman was twice the agitator later on his career than he was early on. You can't you use opinions and claim they are facts. The only facts are that the '86 Celtics were the best team that year and the Bulls were the best team in '96. And I honestly believe the '97 team with Brian Williams off the bench was better.

[Sir Charles]

The same 1986 Celtics that MJ almost beat single handedly with a 63 point effort in the playoffs?

On a MUCH worse team than he had in '96?

Sure they got sweeped in that series, but MJ had to output crazy numbers to make up for the crap team he had. Didn't that team have like the worst record to make the playoffs? And they gave the 86 Celtics problems? Imagine what the 96 Bulls would do



ALMOST?

3-0 Is Almost? Problems? :oldlol:

Almost is 4-2, 4-3

A good run is 5-1

but 3-0 is Not Even Close to Almost :roll:

I reckon Jordan even saying that the McHale and Parish were talking more trash than ever that series and taking the Game lightly. Its on video:) . The only player that had it tough was Ainge, guarding Jordan.

PARISH-McHALE-BIRD and WALTON (on the bench) were LAUGUING at the BULLS. Only Jordan recieved some recognition.

:violin:

[1987_Lakers]

The same 1986 Celtics that MJ almost beat single handedly with a 63 point effort in the playoffs?

On a MUCH worse team than he had in '96?

Sure they got sweeped in that series, but MJ had to output crazy numbers to make up for the crap team he had. Didn't that team have like the worst record to make the playoffs? And they gave the 86 Celtics problems? Imagine what the 96 Bulls would do

Other than that Double OT game in Game 2 The Celtics dominated the Bulls.

The Celtics won by 19 points in game 1. And they won by 18 Points in game 3.

[72-10]

The same 1986 Celtics that MJ almost beat single handedly with a 63 point effort in the playoffs?

On a MUCH worse team than he had in '96?

Sure they got sweeped in that series, but MJ had to output crazy numbers to make up for the crap team he had. Didn't that team have like the worst record to make the playoffs? And they gave the 86 Celtics problems? Imagine what the 96 Bulls would do

Stupidity abounds with 87 Lakers, don't pay him much heed.

[Sir Charles]

I agree that Pippen was a Scoring Threat but not a GREAT SCORING THREAT which Bird was:) . Then again Pippen was a Better Man to Man Defender than bird... Bird was a Better Team Defender, Clutch Player, Better Rebounder and Ofcourse better Passer-Assister and Game Creator.

Yes but from the Point Guard Position to score he would have to drive in All the Time Against DJ whom was not as easy to pass as you think:no: . Especially if the Game was a Half Court Slow Pace (whch the Celtics would Force to Make at all Cost). So if he did Drive in and Score when he misses layps or shots then DJ would have oppen lanes to start fast breaks and finish them himself easy as he did many times in the Play-Offs. The Celtics would eventually make them game so..

BACKCOURT:


Pippen plays (PG-SG) and Bird (SG/SF)

Pippen v.s Bird

Bird would constantly Post Up Pippen as he did even in the early 90s. Schooling Him in Scoring, Rebounds and Assits. Pippen would obviously play Great Perimiter Defense but lets remember: this is Bird not in the Late 90s and early 90s but Bird in 84-85 to 86 seasons. A Much Faster Bird with a Back. So Pippen would have to Work even harder than he did to Stop Magic because Bird was a MAJOR SCORING THREAT and WORKED ASOUME OFF THE PICKS. PICKS which would would be Set Up my WALTON and McHALE.

Bird would obviously have a hard time Guarding Pippen one on one because Pip is faster but Bird is known for his "witts". He would just Retreat into a Half Court Slow Paced Game and force Pippen to Shoot. Pip was a Good Shooter but not a Great Shooter and...

We are also talking about Pippen at PG. His role would be to CREATE for his TEAM (which would not have a SCORING THREAT FRONTLINE with GRANT-RODMAN AND A WENNINGTON/LONGLEY etc). Pippen would have to do the following things:

1st CREATE. 2nd DEFEND (BIRD) 3rd-SCORE

Jordan (SG) vs DJ (PG)

Jordan would obviousLy Score his High Scoring Games but DJ in his Prime was not an easy guy to Guard himself. DJ was an asoume Post Player from the Guard Position and Loved Slow Pace Games. Dj wa quite strong and loved to use his butt and make you work your ass of in a Slow Pace Game. Jordan might stop DJ from Scoring alot ofcouse do to his great Defense but he would DEFINETLY NOT STOP DJ from MAKING GREAT PASSES to McHALE in the POST, BIRD of the Pick and Rolls (which Scottie never could stop) and PARISH in the Paint.

Then you had Jordan and Pippen doing BOTH CREATING and SCORING JOBS for the Whole Series. Plus Pippen GUARDING BIRD. This would definetly be a heavy Load for both.

Lets also remember that Ainge would also come in for some parts of the Game and this guy was ONE OF THE MOST UNDERRATED GREAT ROLL PLAYERS EVER AND HE COULD SHOOT and ECAPE REALLY WELL OFF PICK AND ROLLSt. In his Prime we was also a QUITE FAST. Jordan would have to work there to. POST UP against DJ AND RUN Against AINGE.

PIPPEN would eventually have to Rest same part of game so Harper would b the Point Guard and this guy would have more trouble Guarding BIRD than Pippen:) .

Nor Pippen nor Harper would stop a PRIME BIRD from Scoring 25-40, dishing in 5-8 assits and getting 10-15 boards.

If the Bulls put in PAXON or KERR as Combo Guards then they would Loose PASSING ABILITIES, SCORING ABILITIES, HEIGHT PRESENCE, STRENGTH and...

DANNY AINGES, DJs and BIRDS SCORING would be FLYING OUT THE WINDOW:) .

Forget about PAXON and KERR playing

So this means JORDAN AND PIPPEN/HARPER would have to play each alot of Minutes because only Harper would be their Substitute. This would be them playing alog of Minutes. SCORING-DEFENDING and being THE ONLY CREATIVE PLAYERS CAPANLE. But yes with a Frontline with No Talent (with the exception of Kucok). Pippen and Jordan would just better of dont pass in THE POST.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

FRONT COURT(FRONTLINE)

Since the Celtics would use their Big Line Up they would use McHale at the PF, Walton as Center Forward (C-F) in a Twin Tower System (ala Hakeem-Samson, Duncan-Robinson) with Center Parish

You would end up with this:

McHALE (PF) vs RODMAN/GRANT/ KUKOC (PFs-SF)

McHale was 6`10 ft (with a 7.2 footers arm range) tht could score 26 ppg at an Efficiency of 60.4%FG at one time. He would not be stooped in the Post by 6`6 1/2 ft Dennis Rodman nor Grant. McHale was a player whom needed Centers to Guard (even Kareem) him and still they failed from Stoping him :confusedshrug:.

Ofcouse if it was Rodman guadhing Mchale would have a harder time rebounding. Rodman might get in a couple of Offensive Rebounds but not as he usually dominated and he would be in faul troule. He could not stop 6`10 (7`2 ft arm range) McHale from scoring. Rodman and Grant would be flying all over the place with Foul Trouble trying to guard McHale and don`t expect Grant to outrebound McHale in any case. Then again McHale would be stoping Grant or Rodman (who ever played him) from Scoring big time.

If they put on KuKoc. McHale would definetly have a hard time Guarding him do to Speed and talent. Kucok would have to be forced to score from the outside the whole game which is not very efficient for the Bulls. Obviously Mchale would stop Kukoc from scoring in Post and would obviously destroy him in Rebounds.

Then again if Kukoc was guarding McHale. You would have not only a worst Rebounder than Grant-Rodman but also a Very Weak Post Defender. McHale`s s PRIME Scoring Averages and FG% would be flying out the window with this man guarding him. That is the price the Bulls would have to Pay for putting a more Talentd Scoring Kukoc on McHale. Maybe a little more Scoring but NO REBOUNDING and an EASIER TIME FOR MCHALE to SCHOOL IN THE POST.:)

WALTON (CF) v.s WENNINGTON/LONGLEY/GRANT (Cs and PF)

They would certainly Not Out Rebound Walton. Nor Stop him from Scoring. They might be able to tire him off for 30s minutes but he remember Walton is an Ex ALL STAR = Even Past his Prime he could take his GAME TO ANOTHER LEVEL. Something These dudes couldnt :no:. Walton would stop them from scoring, would score on them and out outrebound them

Finally...

PARISH vs WENNINGTON/LONGLEY

Parish in his Prime (still 32 years of age in 86) was a man that could average 15-19 PPG while Scoring at an Efficiency of close to 60% FG. Was a 10-12 RPG man and an absolute Post Up Defensive Stopper. Parish would be too Fast for slow Longley and Wennington and Way More Agressive and Witty than these two.

Parish would Stop them from Scoring, Outrebound them and obviously would Kill them in the Paint Post Up to Score.

Finished.

The Bulls would have to Play A FAST PACE GAME and the CETLICS A SLOW POST UP FRONTCOURT GAME.

At the End the BULLS don`t have the TALENT and BENCH to PLAY LIKE THE 1980s LAKERS FAST PACED STYLE and WIN. So the Bulls would be FORCED TO PLAY CELTICS GAME (SLOW PACE FRONTCOURT POST UP GAME) and THEY WOULD BE FALLING INTO A TRAP

There is absolutely no way the 1996 Bulls would beat a PRIME 1986 CELTICS.

CELTICS 4, BULLS 2 (If that)

There is Enough Proof:violin:

END

This is the Evidence that the Jordan Fans and Bulls fans of the weaker 90s don`t want to see:D :confusedshrug:

[1987_Lakers]

Stupidity abounds with 87 Lakers, don't pay him much heed.


Comparing Penny Hardaway and Chris Webber to Magic Johnson and Charles Barkley is stupid.

Saying Sam Perkins was a Center for the '91 Lakers is stupid.

[97 bulls]

Comparing Penny Hardaway and Chris Webber to Magic Johnson and Charles Barkley is stupid.

Saying Sam Perkins was a Center for the '91 Lakers is stupid.

i dont know why perkins was listed as a pf and center same as thompson kareem and divac were the centers. but ,like i said add ac green respective seasons and the lakers got about the same production. please explain why.
AND MY QUESTION IS STILL NOT ANSWERED. I i will assume that since your avoiding it you must agree.

[1987_Lakers]

This is the Evidence that the Jordan Fans and Bulls fans of the weaker 90s don`t want to see:D :confusedshrug:

So true:roll:

[1987_Lakers]

i dont know why perkins was listed as a pf and center same as thompson kareem and divac were the centers. but ,like i said add ac green respective seasons and the lakers got about the same production. please explain why.
AND MY QUESTION IS STILL NOT ANSWERED. I i will assume that since your avoiding it you must agree.

1987 Lakers vs 1991 Lakers

'87..............'91
C - Kareem / Thompson > Divac / Thompson
PF - Green / Rambis < Perkins / Green
SF - '87 Worthy > '91 Worthy
SG - '87 Byron Scott / Cooper > '91 Byron Scott / Terry Teagle
PG - ' 87 Magic > '91 Magic

Coach
Pat Riley > Mike Dunleavy

To even compare the '87 Lakers to the '91 Lakers is retarded. The Lakers were much more dominant in '87. They won 65 games and they had a record of 43-8 once Mychal Thompson arrived to LA.

[97 bulls]

1987 Lakers vs 1991 Lakers

'87..............'91
C - Kareem / Thompson > Divac / Thompson
PF - Green / Rambis < Perkins / Green
SF - '87 Worthy > '91 Worthy
SG - '87 Byron Scott / Cooper > '91 Byron Scott / Terry Teagle
PG - ' 87 Magic > '91 Magic

Coach
Pat Riley > Mike Dunleavy

To even compare the '87 Lakers to the '91 Lakers is retarded. The Lakers were much more dominant in '87. They won 65 games and they had a record of 43-8 once Mychal Thompson arrived to LA.
i dont see why magic was the reigning back to back mvp worthy had his highest scoring average and the overall output from their bigmen is the same

[1987_Lakers]

i dont see why magic was the reigning back to back mvp worthy had his highest scoring average and the overall output from their bigmen is the same

Magic's best season was without a doubt in '87. He had the greatest PG season in NBA History. Any Magic Johnson fan will tell you that. Worthy was also better in '87. That was the year he earned the nickname "BIG GAME JAMES". he averaged more points in '91 because the '91 lakers didn't have the weapons they had in '87 so they relied more on Worthy. Worthy only shot 14.7 attempts per game in '87 while in '91 shot 18.7 attempts per game. In the playoffs James Worthy was much better in '87. In the '87 Playoffs he averaged 23.6 PPG while shooting 59 FG%. In the '91 playoffs he averaged 21.1 PPG but was shooting 46.5 FG%.

[97 bulls]

Magic's best season was without a doubt in '87. He had the greatest PG season in NBA History. Any Magic Johnson fan will tell you that. Worthy was also better in '87. That was the year he earned the nickname "BIG GAME JAMES". he averaged more points in '91 because the '91 lakers didn't have the weapons they had in '87 so they relied more on Worthy. Worthy only shot 14.7 attempts per game in '87 while in '91 shot 18.7 attempts per game. In the playoffs James Worthy was much better in '87. In the '87 Playoffs he averaged 23.6 PPG while shooting 59 FG%. In the '91 playoffs he averaged 21.1 PPG but was shooting 46.5 FG%.

well, thats statistically, he was the back to back mvp so he wasnt on the decline. and i know worthys fg% was down and that was probably because he decided to start shooting threes. and as far as playoffs, i dont think you can call 2 points differrnce a decline.

[97 bulls]

im still waiting for my the answer to my question, would it have been better if the bulls had lost to the knicks or utah in the seasons they went to the finals? not in 94 without jordan or in 95 with a rusty jordan.

[1987_Lakers]

im still waiting for my the answer to my question, would it have been better if the bulls had lost to the knicks or utah in the seasons they went to the finals? not in 94 without jordan or in 95 with a rusty jordan.

I really don't get that question.

[1987_Lakers]

and once again, why because the bulls destroyed everyone they played and the celtics couldnt. it sounds to me that by your logic, if utah or the knicks beat the bulls then the bulls would then be better.:hammerhead: now how ridiculous is that. but please answer this question, if the bulls lost the knicks or utah once or twice would that give more credence to their dominance.

Ok I get what you are saying. The Answer is NO.

But keep in mind those Knicks and Utah teams were no where near as good as the '82-'83 Sixers,' 88-'89 Pistons, and the '85-'87 Lakers. Those teams were the reasons why the Celtics didn't dominate like the Bulls did. If those 80's Celtics played in the 90's and Jordan's Bulls never existed...those Celtics would have been just as if not more dominant than Jordan's Bulls.

Like i said earlier The Jazz had Greg Ostertag and Bryon Russell in the starting line up. That team would not make the finals in the mid 80's. My point is there were much better teams in the 80's than in the 90's. Which is one of the reasons why the 80's were a better decade.

[Sir Charles]

1987 Lakers vs 1991 Lakers

'87..............'91
C - Kareem / Thompson > Divac / Thompson
PF - Green / Rambis < Perkins / Green
SF - '87 Worthy > '91 Worthy
SG - '87 Byron Scott / Cooper > '91 Byron Scott / Terry Teagle
PG - ' 87 Magic > '91 Magic

Coach
Pat Riley > Mike Dunleavy

To even compare the '87 Lakers to the '91 Lakers is retarded. The Lakers were much more dominant in '87. They won 65 games and they had a record of 43-8 once Mychal Thompson arrived to LA.

I can`t believe people are comparing the 1987 Lakers with the 1991 Lakers. You got to be kidding me:rolleyes:

[Sir Charles]

Magic's best season was without a doubt in '87. He had the greatest PG season in NBA History. Any Magic Johnson fan will tell you that. Worthy was also better in '87. That was the year he earned the nickname "BIG GAME JAMES". he averaged more points in '91 because the '91 lakers didn't have the weapons they had in '87 so they relied more on Worthy. Worthy only shot 14.7 attempts per game in '87 while in '91 shot 18.7 attempts per game. In the playoffs James Worthy was much better in '87. In the '87 Playoffs he averaged 23.6 PPG while shooting 59 FG%. In the '91 playoffs he averaged 21.1 PPG but was shooting 46.5 FG%.

:applause: :rolleyes:

[97 bulls]

this is really getting old. ill say this and then ill end my half of this topic unless someone comes with facts and not opinions. from this convo weve had the last few days i am firmly convinced that 87 lakers and sir charles are one of two things: either they have never played bball due to their sappy reasoning and terrible knowledge. or they are women who only believe what they want to believe or hear what they want to hear. or maybe both of the two.

[1987_Lakers]

this is really getting old. ill say this and then ill end my half of this topic unless someone comes with facts and not opinions. from this convo weve had the last few days i am firmly convinced that 87 lakers and sir charles are one of two things: either they have never played bball due to their sappy reasoning and terrible knowledge. or they are women who only believe what they want to believe or hear what they want to hear. or maybe both of the two.

80's > 90's

[1987_Lakers]

I have given facts in this thread. The only fact you made was that the NBA was more popular in the 90's. When really popularity does not equal quality.

I have proven that there were better teams in the 80's. Better players in the 80's. And better rivalries in the 80's. The 80's are superior to the 90's.

[Sir Charles]

I have given facts in this thread. The only fact you made was that the NBA was more popular in the 90's. When really popularity does not equal quality.

I have proven that there were better teams in the 80's. Better players in the 80's. And better rivalries in the 80's. The 80's are superior to the 90's.

[B]I have even have given a detailed description explaining why the 1996 Bulls would not be able to Beat the 1986 CELTICS with a Prime BIRD, McHALE, PARISH and the crew especially when they put their "BIG LINE UP" already. :hammerhead: :rolleyes: .

This Team was able to hold THE TWIN TOWER 2 CENTER PIECE SYSTEM of Hakeem: a 6`10 ft Defensive-Offensive Force (which Jordan and Pippen hardly ever bean and this time with a better team!) that We Know Already How Good He Was and Ho Much he could make his Teams Better and along Ralph Samson: a 7`4 footer that before his injury was NBA`s BIGGEST MISSMATCH for Centers of Forwards. A 7`4 ft Leaper with the Silky Moves of a SF (and as Fast as SFs) and that could also handle the ball better than most PFs.

The Celtics handled that Rockets FRONTLINE which the SHOWTIME LAKERS with all Their: TALENT, SPEED, SKILL AND SUPERIOR HEIGHT THAN THE 1996 BULLS couldn`t.

And we are talking about a: PRIME MAGIC, PRIME WORTHY, PRIME SCOTT, PRIME A.C GREEN, PRIME RAMBIS, PRIME LUCAS etc and MR. KAREEM still hitting for 23-26 PPG! and 53-56% from the FG! (not the Kareem after 1987:rolleyes: ).... COULD NOT BEAT :hammerhead:.

I`ve given the Descritpion where the Celtics would use their BIG LINE UP and force the Bulls to play a Fast Paced Game but with NO FRONT LINE that could Harm the Celtics. Jordan and Pippen would have to NOT ONLINE TAKE THE LOAD OF CREATING THEMSELVES but ALSO SCORING and THEY WOULD HAVE TO PLAY MANY MINUTES becaue as Soon as One of them Leaves the Court they would ONLY HAVE 1 DAMAGING OFFENSIVE WEAPON (either Jordan or Pippen).

Not to mention that Scottie would have to not only take the LOAD OF CREATING AND SCORING (AFTER JORDAN) but ALSO GUARDING A PRIME BIRD which he could`nt when Bird had no back and was 33-35 years old (now this would be Bird in his 20s).

Just Picture This:

(C): PARISH v.s LONGLEY/WENNINGTON (C)
(CF): WALTON v.s EDWARDS (C)
(PF): McHALE V.s RODMAN (PF)
(SF/SG/PG): BIRD v.s PIPPEN (PG/SF)
(PG/SG): DJ vs JORDAN (SG/PG)


The Only 1 Position in Court where the Bulls have a Clear Superiority is DJ vs JORDAN ---but Jordan could not stop the DJ and Bird combination nor DJ from making Great Passes to the BIG THREE and BIRD himself.

Pippen would have 3 Jobs: 1st CREATE, 2nd GUARD MR BIRD in his PRIME and 3rd SCORE IN THE LEVEL OF A SECOND SCORING THREAT, after Jordan. Too much load:hammerhead:.

Pippen would not Stop Bird from Scoring, Rebounding and Dishing Out Assits to the SUPERIOR FRONT-LINE which would OWN THE BULLS in: SCORING (at a 55-60% FG), REBOUNDING (only Rodman will get a couple of Offensive Rbds more than Mchale), BLOCK SHOTS and GETTING FOULED By the SHORT Bulls Frontline. It would not be a Good Idea to Faul McHale and Parish because both where Good FT% Shooters too)

They only way for the Bulls to Get More Points and Talent in the Frontline would be put in Toni Kukoc as the SF for Most of the Game = [U]this would Lessen the BULLS FRONTLINE DEFENSE and open up McHALE

[97 bulls]

[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]I have even have given a detailed description explaining why the 1996 Bulls would not be able to Beat the 1986 CELTICS with a Prime BIRD, McHALE, PARISH and the crew especially when they put their "BIG LINE UP" already. :hammerhead: :rolleyes: .

This Team was able to hold THE TWIN TOWER 2 CENTER PIECE SYSTEM of Hakeem: a 6`10 ft Defensive-Offensive Force (which Jordan and Pippen hardly ever bean and this time with a better team!) that We Know Already How Good He Was and Ho Much he could make his Teams Better and along Ralph Samson: a 7`4 footer that before his injury was NBA`s BIGGEST MISSMATCH for Centers of Forwards. A 7`4 ft Leaper with the Silky Moves of a SF (and as Fast as SFs) and that could also handle the ball better than most PFs.


The Celtics handled that Rockets FRONTLINE which the SHOWTIME LAKERS with all Their: TALENT, SPEED, SKILL AND SUPERIOR HEIGHT THAN THE 1996 BULLS couldn`t.

And we are talking about a: PRIME MAGIC, PRIME WORTHY, PRIME SCOTT, PRIME A.C GREEN, PRIME RAMBIS, PRIME LUCAS etc and MR. KAREEM still hitting for 23-26 PPG! and 53-56% from the FG! (not the Kareem after 1987:rolleyes: ).... COULD NOT BEAT :hammerhead:.

I`ve given the Descritpion where the Celtics would use their BIG LINE UP and force the Bulls to play a Fast Paced Game but with NO FRONT LINE that could Harm the Celtics. Jordan and Pippen would have to NOT ONLINE TAKE THE LOAD OF CREATING THEMSELVES but ALSO SCORING and THEY WOULD HAVE TO PLAY MANY MINUTES becaue as Soon as One of them Leaves the Court they would ONLY HAVE 1 DAMAGING OFFENSIVE WEAPON (either Jordan or Pippen).

Not to mention that Scottie would have to not only take the LOAD OF CREATING AND SCORING (AFTER JORDAN) but ALSO GUARDING A PRIME BIRD which he could`nt when Bird had no back and was 33-35 years old (now this would be Bird in his 20s).

Just Picture This:

(C): PARISH v.s LONGLEY/WENNINGTON (C)
(CF): WALTON v.s GRANT (PF)
(PF): McHALE V.s RODMAN (PF)
(SF/SG/PG): BIRD v.s PIPPEN (PG/SF)
(PG/SG): DJ vs JORDAN (SG/PG)


The Only 1 Position in Court where the Bulls have a Clear Superiority is DJ vs JORDAN but Jordan could not stop the DJ and Bird combination nor DJ from making Great Passes to the BIG THREE and BIRD himself.

Pippen would have 3 Jobs: 1st CREATE, 2nd GUARD MR BIRD in his PRIME and 3rd SCORE as in the level of a Second Scoring Threat after Jordan. Too much load:hammerhead:.

Pippen would not Stop Bird from Scoring, Rebounding and Dishing Out Assits to the SUPERIOR FRONT-LINE which would OWN THE BULLS in: SCORING (at a 55-60% FG), REBOUNDING (only Rodman will get a couple of Offensive Rbds more than Mchale), BLOCK SHOTS and GETTING FOULED By the SHORT Bulls Frontline (which would not be a good idea because McHale and Parish where Good FT% Shooters too)

They only way for the Bulls Frontline to Get More Points and Get in More Talent would be to Put in [U]Toni Kukoc, which would Lessen the BULLS FRONTLINE DEFENSE and open up McHALE

[97 bulls]

I have given facts in this thread. The only fact you made was that the NBA was more popular in the 90's. When really popularity does not equal quality.

I have proven that there were better teams in the 80's. Better players in the 80's. And better rivalries in the 80's. The 80's are superior to the 90's.
you said the 80s teams were better because they had more hof. i rebutted this by saying how many of those players were playing at a hof level for that year. and like 90s teams, the answer is 2. there is no proof that 80s players are any better. but if i remember correct your reasoning was because of the 80s drafted players dominating the 90s. i rebutted this by saying 70s players dominated the early to mid 80s too. 4 of the first 5 MVPs were won by players drafted in the 70s. you stated that the 80s were superior to the 90s as far as teams and use faster pace stats and the "watered down" theory as your reasoning. i rebutted this by showing you that the league wasnt watered down, the pace was slower which means lower stats and, the waterd down theory is not a good one because as far as talent level, there were still plenty of good basketball players to go around. thats no more an exact science than the nba draft. which always has high draft pick bust (kwame brown, michael olowakandi) to name a few. you also said that an older larry bird was better than a young 24 year old pippen and i showed you that they were break even even with bird being the number 1 option and pippen second to jordan. and pippen made him average about 5 TOs a game on the defensive side. the only thing the 80s has over the other eras is the rivaly between magic and bird. and i feel that the games were better with the more up tempo fast break style of ball.

[97 bulls]

[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]I have even have given a detailed description explaining why the 1996 Bulls would not be able to Beat the 1986 CELTICS with a Prime BIRD, McHALE, PARISH and the crew especially when they put their "BIG LINE UP" already. :hammerhead: :rolleyes: .

This Team was able to hold THE TWIN TOWER 2 CENTER PIECE SYSTEM of Hakeem: a 6`10 ft Defensive-Offensive Force (which Jordan and Pippen hardly ever bean and this time with a better team!) that We Know Already How Good He Was and Ho Much he could make his Teams Better and along Ralph Samson: a 7`4 footer that before his injury was NBA`s BIGGEST MISSMATCH for Centers of Forwards. A 7`4 ft Leaper with the Silky Moves of a SF (and as Fast as SFs) and that could also handle the ball better than most PFs.


The Celtics handled that Rockets FRONTLINE which the SHOWTIME LAKERS with all Their: TALENT, SPEED, SKILL AND SUPERIOR HEIGHT THAN THE 1996 BULLS couldn`t.

And we are talking about a: PRIME MAGIC, PRIME WORTHY, PRIME SCOTT, PRIME A.C GREEN, PRIME RAMBIS, PRIME LUCAS etc and MR. KAREEM still hitting for 23-26 PPG! and 53-56% from the FG! (not the Kareem after 1987:rolleyes: ).... COULD NOT BEAT :hammerhead:.

I`ve given the Descritpion where the Celtics would use their BIG LINE UP and force the Bulls to play a Fast Paced Game but with NO FRONT LINE that could Harm the Celtics. Jordan and Pippen would have to NOT ONLINE TAKE THE LOAD OF CREATING THEMSELVES but ALSO SCORING and THEY WOULD HAVE TO PLAY MANY MINUTES becaue as Soon as One of them Leaves the Court they would ONLY HAVE 1 DAMAGING OFFENSIVE WEAPON (either Jordan or Pippen).

Not to mention that Scottie would have to not only take the LOAD OF CREATING AND SCORING (AFTER JORDAN) but ALSO GUARDING A PRIME BIRD which he could`nt when Bird had no back and was 33-35 years old (now this would be Bird in his 20s).

Just Picture This:

(C): PARISH v.s LONGLEY/WENNINGTON (C)
(CF): WALTON v.s EDWARDS (C)
(PF): McHALE V.s RODMAN (PF)
(SF/SG/PG): BIRD v.s PIPPEN (PG/SF)
(PG/SG): DJ vs JORDAN (SG/PG)


The Only 1 Position in Court where the Bulls have a Clear Superiority is DJ vs JORDAN ---but Jordan could not stop the DJ and Bird combination nor DJ from making Great Passes to the BIG THREE and BIRD himself.

Pippen would have 3 Jobs: 1st CREATE, 2nd GUARD MR BIRD in his PRIME and 3rd SCORE IN THE LEVEL OF A SECOND SCORING THREAT, after Jordan. Too much load:hammerhead:.

Pippen would not Stop Bird from Scoring, Rebounding and Dishing Out Assits to the SUPERIOR FRONT-LINE which would OWN THE BULLS in: SCORING (at a 55-60% FG), REBOUNDING (only Rodman will get a couple of Offensive Rbds more than Mchale), BLOCK SHOTS and GETTING FOULED By the SHORT Bulls Frontline. It would not be a Good Idea to Faul McHale and Parish because both where Good FT% Shooters too)

They only way for the Bulls to Get More Points and Talent in the Frontline would be put in Toni Kukoc as the SF for Most of the Game = [U]this would Lessen the BULLS FRONTLINE DEFENSE and open up McHALE

[Sir Charles]

are 80s stats higher due to pace?

The 1986 Celtics Could Play BOTH Eastern Style and Western Running Style but it JUST SO HAPPENS that the Celtics where the GREATEST HALFCOURT/SLOW PACE TEAM EVER with Great Spot up Shooters and Passers from the Outside, including Bird.

C: PARISH = MissMatch for Any Bulls Center:hammerhead:

CF: WALTON = Miss Match for Any Bulls Center:hammerhead:

PF: McHALE= Could Only Be Contend for Rebounds but usually Offensive because if McHale would School the Whole Bulls Team 1 on 1 in the Post:D

SG/SF/PG: Bird= Only Battle in the Court with Pippen. Bird at age 27 Would Outscore Pippen, Out Rebound Pippen and Out Assist Pippen. Bird would have tough time but Pippen would have it even tougher because he would have to Guard PRIME BIRD, CREATE for his INEFFICIENT FRONTLINE and BE THE SECOND SCORING THREAT: TOO MUCH LOAD!:hammerhead:

PG/SG: Jordan would win this match but would not prevent DJ from 1stly CREATING & ASSISTING = BIRD (Great Combination), McHALE or PARISH. DJ would Slow the Pace Down and then Ainge would Come in to make Jordan Run

So here it is:

You have 3 POSITIONS TOTALLY DOMINATED by the CELTICS (C, CF and PF)

You have 1 POSITION DOMINATED BY THE CELTICS (SF-SG/PG-SF) in the Bird vs Pip, which Bird would eventually win at his PRIME and yes knowing that Bird was like MAGIC (could make temates much better than Pippen or Jordan)

Finally, you only have 1 POSITION DOMINATED by the BULLS (PG/SG) in the DJ vs JORDAN

CELTICS 6, BULLS 2. And Im being Nice :rolleyes:

If you don`t believe me Just go Watch the 2008 NBA FINALS: CELTICS VS LAKERS finals Again.

The CELTICS FRONTLINE Schooled The Lakers Ineffective FRONTLINE: DEFENSIVELY, REBOUNDING and SCORING. Now matter how good Bryant played or Sasha Shot or his BACKCOURT tried it was NO CONTEST.

But in this Case the BULLS Would have to FACE: "PARISH-McHALE WALTON "

(not just Garnett offensively in the Frontline) and yes--- 27 year old BIRD!

LARRY BIRD IN HIS PRIME...WHOM COULD NOT ONLY SCORE, SHOOT AND REBOUND BUT WAS THE GREATEST PASSING FORWARD EVER! AND YES COULD MAKE HIS TEAMATES MUCH BETTER than JORDAN or PIPPEN:confusedshrug:

The Bulls would only have 2 Scoring Threats: Jordan ofcourse and Pippen (whom would have too much LOAD to Carry Guarding Bird, Creating and being the SECOND SCORING THREAT). If the Bulls put in Kukoc to Increase the Frontline Scoring they would also Diminish the Bulls contendinf DEFENSE in the Frontline so the CELTICS would SCHOOL even MORE in THE POST/FRONTLINE!

NO CONTEST

[97 bulls]

The 1986 Celtics Could Play BOTH Eastern Style and Western Running Style but it JUST SO HAPPENS that the Celtics where the GREATEST HALFCOURT/SLOW PACE TEAM EVER with Great Spot up Shooters and Passers from the Outside, including Bird.

C: PARISH = MissMatch for Any Bulls Center:hammerhead:

CF: WALTON = Miss Match for Any Bulls Center:hammerhead:

PF: McHALE= Could Only Be Contend for Rebounds but usually Offensive because if McHale would School the Whole Bulls Team 1 on 1 in the Post:D

SG/SF/PG: Bird= Only Battle in the Court with Pippen. Bird at age 27 Would Outscore Pippen, Out Rebound Pippen and Out Assist Pippen. Bird would have tough time but Pippen would have it even tougher because he would have to Guard PRIME BIRD, CREATE for his INEFFICIENT FRONTLINE and BE THE SECOND SCORING THREAT: TOO MUCH LOAD!:hammerhead:

PG/SG: Jordan would win this match but would not prevent DJ from 1stly CREATING & ASSISTING = BIRD (Great Combination), McHALE or PARISH. DJ would Slow the Pace Down and then Ainge would Come in to make Jordan Run

So here it is:

You have 3 POSITIONS TOTALLY DOMINATED by the CELTICS (C, CF and PF)

You have 1 POSITION DOMINATED BY THE CELTICS (SF-SG/PG-SF) in the Bird vs Pip, which Bird would eventually win at his PRIME and yes knowing that Bird was like MAGIC (could make temates much better than Pippen or Jordan)

Finally, you only have 1 POSITION DOMINATED by the BULLS (PG/SG) in the DJ vs JORDAN

CELTICS 6, BULLS 2. And Im being Nice :rolleyes:

If you don`t believe me Just go Watch the 2008 NBA FINALS: CELTICS VS LAKERS finals Again.

The CELTICS FRONTLINE Schooled The Lakers Ineffective FRONTLINE: DEFENSIVELY, REBOUNDING and SCORING. Now matter how good Bryant played or Sasha Shot or his BACKCOURT tried it was NO CONTEST.

But in this Case the BULLS Would have to FACE: PARISH-McHALE WALTON (not just Garnett offensively in the Frontline) and yes--- 27 year old BIRD!

LARRY BIRD IN HIS PRIME...WHOM COULD NOT ONLY SCORE, SHOOT AND REBOUND BUT WAS THE GREATEST PASSING FORWARD EVER! AND YES COULD MAKE HIS TEAMATES MUCH BETTER than JORDAN or PIPPEN:confusedshrug:

NO CONTEST
was the pace in the 80s highe? even if the celtics played a halfcourt game werent the other teams playing against them running which would mean more shot attempts for the celtics? answer the question GEEZE

[Sir Charles]

was the pace in the 80s highe? even if the celtics played a halfcourt game werent the other teams playing against them running which would mean more shot attempts for the celtics? answer the question GEEZE

The Celtics where the GREATEST HALF COURT POST UP/FRONTLINE TEAM EVER:D . And loved to Play Against the Running Teams except the SHOW TIME LAKERS.

The SHOW TIME LAKERS: differently from the Bulls, had BOTH A "FRONT LINE" (KARREM-WORTHY) that could Score and "BACKCOURT" (MAGIC-SCOTT) that could Score

The BULLS only have JORDAN and PIPPEN. PIPPEN as I said would have too much LOAD: PG Creating, Guarding A PRIME BIRD! and then trying to be the Second Scoring Threat along Jordan because the Bulls Frontline is Pathetic Scoring wise withouth Kucok (whom is a Worst Post Defender than Rodman. Wennington, Edwards or Longley = AND Grant was not in the 1996 Buls :oldlol: )

Only the Lakers where succesfull playing A FAST PACE, why? Because they had Scorers in both BACKCOURT AND FRONT COURT. I repeat, something the Bulls did not in 1996 and even if did with Kukoc coming in as a starting SF. They`d get their ASSES OWNED even MORE against PARISH-WALTON and McHALE because out of all the Fs and Cs from the Bulls Team, Kukoc was the WORST POST DEFENDER!

Just remember what Bird said along Doctor J in the 1998 ALL STAR GAME (PRESENTIN THE 50 GREATST PLAYERS EVER)

"Magic you didn`t have to play anyone to get to the finals" and Magic admits it as true:) . Eastern Conference where the Cetlics, early Sixers, Pistons, Cavs, Knicks and Bulls was the Real Competition whuch Celtics would usually win :confusedshrug:

:rockon: :violin:

[1987_Lakers]

you said the 80s teams were better because they had more hof. i rebutted this by saying how many of those players were playing at a hof level for that year. and like 90s teams, the answer is 2. there is no proof that 80s players are any better. but if i remember correct your reasoning was because of the 80s drafted players dominating the 90s. i rebutted this by saying 70s players dominated the early to mid 80s too. 4 of the first 5 MVPs were won by players drafted in the 70s. you stated that the 80s were superior to the 90s as far as teams and use faster pace stats and the "watered down" theory as your reasoning. i rebutted this by showing you that the league wasnt watered down, the pace was slower which means lower stats and, the waterd down theory is not a good one because as far as talent level, there were still plenty of good basketball players to go around. thats no more an exact science than the nba draft. which always has high draft pick bust (kwame brown, michael olowakandi) to name a few. you also said that an older larry bird was better than a young 24 year old pippen and i showed you that they were break even even with bird being the number 1 option and pippen second to jordan. and pippen made him average about 5 TOs a game on the defensive side. the only thing the 80s has over the other eras is the rivaly between magic and bird. and i feel that the games were better with the more up tempo fast break style of ball.

Each the Lakers and Celtics had 3 HOF players on their team rather you like it or not. The Celtics and Lakers also had the greatest role players in NBA History. Michael Cooper, Byron Scott, Dennis Johnson, Danny Ainge, Bill Walton ('86), Bob McAdoo, A.C. Green. The Bulls role players don't even come close to that.

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 50 greatest players of all time
Magic Johnson - 50 greatest players of all time
James Worthy - 50 greatest players of all time
Larry Bird - 50 greatest players of all time
Kevin McHale - 50 greatest players of all time

Look at the MVPs for the 90's. EVERY PLAYER THAT WON AN MVP AWARD IN THE 90's WERE DRAFTED IN THE EARLY - MID 80's. (except David Robinson) AMAZING!!!!!!

Teams were better in the 80's. 4 of the 10 greatest teams in NBA History played in the 80's. The '83 Sixers, '86 Celtics, '87 Lakers, & '89 Pistons. The NBA was watered down in the mid 90's thats a fact. Do you really think a Jazz team with Greg Ostertag and Bryon Russell would of made the NBA Finals in the mid 80's?? NO!!! In the mid 80's you had 20 HOF players in the NBA with only 23 NBA Teams. That's an average a nearly 1 HOF player per team.

I never said and old Larry Bird was better than a early 90's Scottie Pippen. I just said Bird had pretty good games against Pippen in the early 90's. Please go back an re-read what i posted. Get some reading comprehensions.

[Sir Charles]

Each the Lakers and Celtics had 3 HOF players on their team rather you like it or not. The Celtics and Lakers also had the greatest role players in NBA History. Michael Cooper, Byron Scott, Dennis Johnson, Danny Ainge, Bill Walton ('86), Bob McAdoo, A.C. Green. The Bulls role players don't even come close to that.

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 50 greatest players of all time
Magic Johnson - 50 greatest players of all time
James Worthy - 50 greatest players of all time
Larry Bird - 50 greatest players of all time
Kevin McHale - 50 greatest players of all time

Look at the MVPs for the 90's. EVERY PLAYER THAT WON AN MVP AWARD IN THE 90's WERE DRAFTED IN THE EARLY - MID 80's. (except David Robinson) AMAZING!!!!!!

Teams were better in the 80's. 4 of the 10 greatest teams in NBA History played in the 80's. The '83 Sixers, '86 Celtics, '87 Lakers, & '89 Pistons. The NBA was watered down in the mid 90's thats a fact. Do you really think a Jazz team with Greg Ostertag and Bryon Russell would of made the NBA Finals in the mid 80's?? NO!!! In the mid 80's you had 20 HOF players in the NBA with only 23 NBA Teams. That's an average a nearly 1 HOF player per team.

I never said and old Larry Bird was better than a early 90's Scottie Pippen. I just said Bird had pretty good games against Pippen in the early 90's. Please go back an re-read what i posted. Get some reading comprehensions.

A Players Prime Goes from 22 to 32 at most. Bird from 1990 to 1992 was 33 to 35 years old. That is "WAY PAST HIS PHYSICAL PRIME", PAST "HIS GAME PRIME", "AGED" and "JUST COMMING BACK from BACK INJURY".

Still when one looks at BIRD`s STATS facing the BULLS from 1990 to 1992 they arent that Bad at All. Now when youy look at Birds STATS from 1984 to 1990 you will see BIRD SCHOOLING and GETTING TRIPLE-DOUBLE LIKE FIGURES:confusedshrug:.

SCOTTIE`S BEST SEASON DOESN`T EVEN COMPARE TO BIRDs CAREER AVERAGE STATS :hammerhead:

[97 bulls]

Each the Lakers and Celtics had 3 HOF players on their team rather you like it or not. The Celtics and Lakers also had the greatest role players in NBA History. Michael Cooper, Byron Scott, Dennis Johnson, Danny Ainge, Bill Walton ('86), Bob McAdoo, A.C. Green. The Bulls role players don't even come close to that.

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 50 greatest players of all time
Magic Johnson - 50 greatest players of all time
James Worthy - 50 greatest players of all time
Larry Bird - 50 greatest players of all time
Kevin McHale - 50 greatest players of all time

Look at the MVPs for the 90's. EVERY PLAYER THAT WON AN MVP AWARD IN THE 90's WERE DRAFTED IN THE EARLY - MID 80's. (except David Robinson) AMAZING!!!!!!

Teams were better in the 80's. 4 of the 10 greatest teams in NBA History played in the 80's. The '83 Sixers, '86 Celtics, '87 Lakers, & '89 Pistons. The NBA was watered down in the mid 90's thats a fact. Do you really think a Jazz team with Greg Ostertag and Bryon Russell would of made the NBA Finals in the mid 80's?? NO!!! In the mid 80's you had 20 HOF players in the NBA with only 23 NBA Teams. That's an average a nearly 1 HOF player per team.

I never said and old Larry Bird was better than a early 90's Scottie Pippen. I just said Bird had pretty good games against Pippen in the early 90's. Please go back an re-read what i posted. Get some reading comprehensions.
yes they had three but like i said playing at a hof level lets look deeper in 85 kareem was playing at a hof 22 ppg and 8 boards but not yet worthy at 17 and 6. or look at it this way, if worthy didnt play another game after 85 he woulnt be in the hall.

and you said that an old larry bird destroyed scottie pippen and i showed that he didnt. all the other stuff you typed about 157 times and i defused them 157 times. please come with something better and different.

[1987_Lakers]

yes they had three but like i said playing at a hof level lets look deeper in 85 kareem was playing at a hof 22 ppg and 8 boards but not yet worthy at 17 and 6. or look at it this way, if worthy didnt play another game after 85 he woulnt be in the hall.

and you said that an old larry bird destroyed scottie pippen and i showed that he didnt. all the other stuff you typed about 157 times and i defused them 157 times. please come with something better and different.

Lets look at 1986 Lakers. I know they didn't make the finals that year but their big 3 were playing at HOF level.

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: 23.4 PPG
Magic Johnson: 18.8 PPG. 12.6 APG
James Worthy: 20 PPG

Bottom line is the lakers and Celtics were DEEPER than those Bulls team and you know it. And look at the MVP's for the 90's. 9 out of the 10 MVPS in the 90's were drafted in the Golden mid 80's.

[97 bulls]

A Players Prime Goes from 22 to 32 at most. Bird from 1990 to 1992 was 33 to 35 years old. That is "WAY PAST HIS PHYSICAL PRIME", PAST "HIS GAME PRIME", "AGED" and "JUST COMMING BACK from BACK INJURY".

Still when one looks at BIRD`s STATS facing the BULLS from 1990 to 1992 they arent that Bad at All. Now when youy look at Birds STATS from 1984 to 1990 you will see BIRD SCHOOLING and GETTING TRIPLE-DOUBLE LIKE FIGURES:confusedshrug:.

SCOTTIE`S BEST SEASON DOESN`T EVEN COMPARE TO BIRDs CAREER AVERAGE STATS :hammerhead:

and once again look at pace you idiot. i believe me and 87 had this discussion before and i showed them that adjusted for pace pippen as a second option not a first option like bird, would average about 24-25 ppg 8-10 boards and 6-7 ast. along with being one of the greatest defensive players ever.

[1987_Lakers]

and once again look at pace you idiot. i believe me and 87 had this discussion before and i showed them that adjusted for pace pippen as a second option not a first option like bird, would average about 24-25 ppg 8-10 boards and 6-7 ast. along with being one of the greatest defensive players ever.

Scottie Pippen is not on Bird's level.

[97 bulls]

Lets look at 1986 Lakers. I know they didn't make the finals that year but their big 3 were playing at HOF level.

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: 23.4 PPG
Magic Johnson: 18.8 PPG. 12.6 APG
James Worthy: 20 PPG

Bottom line is the lakers and Celtics were DEEPER than those Bulls team and you know it. And look at the MVP's for the 90's. 9 out of the 10 MVPS in the 90's were drafted in the Golden mid 80's.
first, they shouldnt be in the discussion because they didnt get in the finals
second every bench player on the celtics and lakers were career journeymen at least kukoc was an olympian and regarded as the best player in europe and was a 20 ppg scorer in atlanta and chicago after 98. and won the sixth man award. brian williams was the best player on the clippers and one of the best players in detroit and held his own against the best collection of centers ever. steve kerr is the all-time leader in 3pt shooting and i believe has 2 3pt shootong titles and is an integral part of 5 championships. and regared as one of the best jumpshooters in the clutch ever. the bulls had an accomplished bench.

[97 bulls]

Scottie Pippen is not on Bird's level.
no but hes very close especially to be a second fiddle player in a slower pace

[1987_Lakers]

first, they shouldnt be in the discussion because they didnt get in the finals
second every bench player on the celtics and lakers were career journeymen at least kukoc was an olympian and regarded as the best player in europe and was a 20 ppg scorer in atlanta and chicago after 98. and won the sixth man award. brian williams was the best player on the clippers and one of the best players in detroit and held his own against the best collection of centers ever. steve kerr is the all-time leader in 3pt shooting and i believe has 2 3pt shootong titles and is an integral part of 5 championships. and regared as one of the best jumpshooters in the clutch ever. the bulls had an accomplished bench.

Just because they didn't make the Finals doesn't mean they shouldn't be discussed. They still had 3 HOFers.:roll:

I'm sorry but the Celtics and Lakers bench players were former All stars, DPOY, and former MVPs.

Kevin McHale: Celtics 6th man 1981-1984. HOF player
Michael Cooper: 1987 DPOY
Bob McAdoo: 5 time all star. 1975 NBA MVP. HOF
Mychal Thompson: 1st pick of the 1978 NBA Draft. 20/10 player in '82.
Bill Walton: 1978 NBA MVP. 1986 Sixth Man. HOF
Scott Wedman: 1 time NBA All Star

To even compare guys like Tonu Kukoc, Steve Kerr, and Brian Williams to the Celtics-Lakers bench is laughable. :roll:

Kerr, Williams, and Kukoc were never NBA All Stars.

That was seriously one of the dumbest arguments i've ever heard.

[nycelt84]

The 1986 Celtics Could Play BOTH Eastern Style and Western Running Style but it JUST SO HAPPENS that the Celtics where the GREATEST HALFCOURT/SLOW PACE TEAM EVER with Great Spot up Shooters and Passers from the Outside, including Bird.

C: PARISH = MissMatch for Any Bulls Center:hammerhead:

CF: WALTON = Miss Match for Any Bulls Center:hammerhead:

PF: McHALE= Could Only Be Contend for Rebounds but usually Offensive because if McHale would School the Whole Bulls Team 1 on 1 in the Post:D

SG/SF/PG: Bird= Only Battle in the Court with Pippen. Bird at age 27 Would Outscore Pippen, Out Rebound Pippen and Out Assist Pippen. Bird would have tough time but Pippen would have it even tougher because he would have to Guard PRIME BIRD, CREATE for his INEFFICIENT FRONTLINE and BE THE SECOND SCORING THREAT: TOO MUCH LOAD!:hammerhead:

PG/SG: Jordan would win this match but would not prevent DJ from 1stly CREATING & ASSISTING = BIRD (Great Combination), McHALE or PARISH. DJ would Slow the Pace Down and then Ainge would Come in to make Jordan Run

So here it is:

You have 3 POSITIONS TOTALLY DOMINATED by the CELTICS (C, CF and PF)

You have 1 POSITION DOMINATED BY THE CELTICS (SF-SG/PG-SF) in the Bird vs Pip, which Bird would eventually win at his PRIME and yes knowing that Bird was like MAGIC (could make temates much better than Pippen or Jordan)

Finally, you only have 1 POSITION DOMINATED by the BULLS (PG/SG) in the DJ vs JORDAN

CELTICS 6, BULLS 2. And Im being Nice :rolleyes:

If you don`t believe me Just go Watch the 2008 NBA FINALS: CELTICS VS LAKERS finals Again.

The CELTICS FRONTLINE Schooled The Lakers Ineffective FRONTLINE: DEFENSIVELY, REBOUNDING and SCORING. Now matter how good Bryant played or Sasha Shot or his BACKCOURT tried it was NO CONTEST.

But in this Case the BULLS Would have to FACE: "PARISH-McHALE WALTON "

(not just Garnett offensively in the Frontline) and yes--- 27 year old BIRD!

LARRY BIRD IN HIS PRIME...WHOM COULD NOT ONLY SCORE, SHOOT AND REBOUND BUT WAS THE GREATEST PASSING FORWARD EVER! AND YES COULD MAKE HIS TEAMATES MUCH BETTER than JORDAN or PIPPEN:confusedshrug:

The Bulls would only have 2 Scoring Threats: Jordan ofcourse and Pippen (whom would have too much LOAD to Carry Guarding Bird, Creating and being the SECOND SCORING THREAT). If the Bulls put in Kukoc to Increase the Frontline Scoring they would also Diminish the Bulls contendinf DEFENSE in the Frontline so the CELTICS would SCHOOL even MORE in THE POST/FRONTLINE!

NO CONTEST

The reason why the Celtics used that frontline against the Rockets was to take away the Rockets frontline advantage and that was going to give them the best chance of winning. It's the same reason the Lakers traded for Mychal Thompson the next year to take away the Rockets frontline advantage. Most of the Celtics games they played in this was not their typical lineup. All 5 starters averaged over 30 minutes per game. Walton was at 19.3 minutes per game, Jerry Sichting averaged more minutes than Walton that year. Lastly Larry Bird turned 27 in 1983 he was not 27 in 1986.

[1987_Lakers]

no but hes very close especially to be a second fiddle player in a slower pace

Pippen isnt "very close" to Bird. Larry Bird is one of the top 3 greatest players in NBA History. Some argue Pippen isn't even on the top 20 players in NBA History.

[nycelt84]

Pippen isnt "very close" to Bird. Larry Bird is one of the top 3 greatest players in NBA History. Some argue Pippen isn't even on the top 20 players in NBA History.

Larry Bird is top 10 but he isn't top 3. Scottie Pippen isn't top 20 nor top 30.

[Loki]

LOL @ Pippen being "very close" to Bird. :oldlol: There are only about 7-8 players in history who you could say that about, and Pippen is not only not one of them, he's not anywhere near the conversation.

[1987_Lakers]

Larry Bird is top 10 but he isn't top 3. Scottie Pippen isn't top 20 nor top 30.

I'd put him in the top 5 with MJ, Magic, Wilt, and Kareem. And he is without a doubt the greatest SF of all time.

Pippen on the other hand might not be a top 5 SF. I have Bird, Havlicek, Barry, Baylor, and Erving ahead of Pippen.

[Sir Charles]

The reason why the Celtics used that frontline against the Rockets was to take away the Rockets frontline advantage and that was going to give them the best chance of winning. It's the same reason the Lakers traded for Mychal Thompson the next year to take away the Rockets frontline advantage. Most of the Celtics games they played in this was not their typical lineup. All 5 starters averaged over 30 minutes per game. Walton was at 19.3 minutes per game, Jerry Sichting averaged more minutes than Walton that year. Lastly Larry Bird turned 27 in 1983 he was not 27 in 1986.

So whats the problem?:rolleyes: That is what coaching a Team is All About. As the 1986 Celtics did with the Rockets. They adjusted their Line According to the Team they Faced. That happens in Soccer and probaly Football, Hockey ALL TEAM SPORTS. You put the Line-Ups According to the Style, Strengths and Weaknesses of you enemy.

If they faced a 1996 Bulls they would put that FRONTCOURT Line Up to take advantage of that WEAK SMALL FRONTLINE that the Bulls had in 1996 . A Line Up Poor in Scoring Abilities: Wennington/Longley, Rodman and who ever was there!

Obviously you could not put in Toni Kukoc as a starter in SF (against the Celtics) because he would be destroyed by McHale or Walton in Rebounds, Scoring and FG% at an even higher rate and this would force the Bulls to have a Thinner Line Up in the Post and Weaker Defensive Line Up as Team.:hammerhead:. Kevin Mchale was a 6`10 PF with a 7.2 ft ARM RANGE WITH POST MOVES OUT OF THIS PLANET... that needed 7`0 ft Center-Forwards to Come in to Try to Stop him from Scoring in the Post. And guess what? 17-19 PPG in 32 Minuts of Play Only with a 56-60.4% FG% for a Whole Career means they rearly could Stop him from Scoring :oldlol: .

Bird was 29 in 1986 so that still PRIME TIME:) Check out his stat averages for the 1985-86 Season and 1986 Play-Offs.:oldlol:

The Bulls would obviously try to get their advantage in The FRONTCOURT with Jordan v.s DJ/Ainge . Jordan would definetly shut them from getting in close to the Paint but Who Really Cares? :confusedshrug: They would JUST KEEP ON THROWING in PASSES to CELTICS FRONT-LINE and Bird himself (none of These Could be Stopped). Jordan would have to work hard because DJ was witty and would slow him in the Post and Ainge was fast and could shoot so he would have to run when Ainge comes In.

Bird was a Man that could Play SG-SF and even PF in his Prime and in that Slow Pace Half Court Style which the Bulls WOULD BE FORCE TO PLAY, Larry would just retreat back and force Pippen to Take Shots fron a Distance = Not Pippen`s especiallity.

Bird would not be Stopped from Scoring from the Outside, would School Pippen if he Posted Up, He Would Not Be Stopped from Making his Teamats Better either through Passing, Awareness and he would Definetly not be Outrebounded by Pippen. Bird would also escape from the Pick and Rolls and SCORE Or FEED in PASSES to his FRONTLINE: A Frontline which would School the Bulls Frontline. And let me remined that you are not talking about Any Forward, You Are Talking About the GREATEST PASSING FORWARD EVER, capable of Scoring 29.9 PPG, Rebounding 14 RPG and yes passing 8.2 APG in the Clutch Play-Offs!.

I would like to Remined You that Mr Walton was capable even Past His Prime in 1985-86 to get 14 PPG at 56.2% FG and 12.7 RPG per 36 Minutes of Play. And if he could go Against Hakeem and Samson he would even easier go up Against Slower and Less Talented Wennington/Longley or who ever PF-Center they put.

Walton was one of the Greast Fundamental and PASSING CENTERS Ever. He could even Make his Teamates Better from that Position Dishing out for AINGE and DJ to Shoot for Open Shots and even in Great Team Work along BIRD-McHALE and PARISH.

And yes with not HAKEEM and Not SAMSON GUARDING HIM...He would Have it WAY EASIER TO SCORE HIMSELF.

The Bulls would suffer what the Lakers suffered rignt now in the 2008 NBA FINALS. Now matter how Bryant, Fisher and Sasha played They Suffered

The Destruction of their FRONTLINE in SCORING, REBOUNDING, FG% and FOUL TROUBLE butl...Let me remined the the BACKCOURT you`d have would be: BIRD-AINGE-DJ :eek:

No Contest!:violin:

[Sir Charles]

and once again look at pace you idiot. i believe me and 87 had this discussion before and i showed them that adjusted for pace pippen as a second option not a first option like bird, would average about 24-25 ppg 8-10 boards and 6-7 ast. along with being one of the greatest defensive players ever.

Scottie would TRY TO BE A SECOND SCORING OPTION from the PG because there is NO TALENT in the BULLS FRONT LINE.

Poor PippeN would have to Play PG for Kerr/PaXon (they would no contest for DJ/Ainge! and if they where playing, the Bulls would have AN EVEN WAKER FRONTLINE because they would have to Force PIPPEN to Play at te SF Position and the Rebounding and Post Defense would Weaken and Yes Celtics would have an even Higher Height Advantage!!!).

He would have to try to make his FRONTLINE composed of RODMAN, WENNINGTON/LONGLEY/ KUKOC etc try TRY TO SCORE over a WAY SUPERIOR CELTICS FRONTLINE in SCORING, REBOUNDING, DEFENSE AND FG%.

Too much Load for Pippen. He would have to 1st Create, then 2nd Be the Second Leading Socrer (Jordan would obviously Dominate the Scoring Contest against DJ/Ainge) and MR PIPPEN would ALSO have to GUARD a 29 Year Old Bird.

Not the Bird he Guarded between Ages 32 to 34 (1988 to 1991) Whome he Failed Miserably to Guard. Look at the Stat Sheets and Look at the Videos in Youtube. Bird got to Score on Him High 30s, over 12 rebounds and like 8 Assits per Game plus Hit 2 Game Winning Shots: One on Jordan-Pippen`s face and also another CLUTCH SHOT in 1990-91 to Beat the Bulls agains GRANT.

In those Games BIRD was Guarded by Both GRANT and PIPPEN and they could not STOP HIM FROM SCHOOLING. So imagine Bird not between 32 to 35 years old (and after his Back Inury in 1989) but Bird in 1986 at age 29!!!!!!!!


No Contest :confusedshrug:

[nycelt84]

So whats the problem?:rolleyes: That is what coaching a Team is All About. As the 1986 Celtics did with the Rockets. They adjusted their Line According to the Team they Faced. That happens in Soccer and probaly Football, Hockey all Team Sports. You put the Line-Ups According to the Style, Strengths and Weaknesses of you enemy.

If they faced a 1996 Bulls they would put that FRONCOURT Line Up to take advantage of that WEAK SMALL FRONTLINE that the Bulls had . A Line Up Poor in Scoring Abilities: Wennington/Longley, Rodman and who ever was there!

Obviously you could not put in Toni Kukoc as a starter in SF (against the Celtics) because he would be destroyed by McHale or Walton in Rebounds, Scoring and FG% .:hammerhead:. Kevin Mchale was a 6`10 PF with a 7.2 ft ARM RANGE WITH POST MOVES OUT OF THIS PLANET... that needed 7`0 ft Center-Forwards to Com in to Try to Stop him from Scoring in the Post. And guess what? 17-19 PPG in 32 Minuts of Play Only with a 56-60.4% FG%, means they rearly could Stop him from Scoring :oldlol: .

Bird was 29 in 1986 so that still PRIME TIME:) Check out his stat averages for the 1985-86 Season and 1986 Play-Offs.:oldlol:

The Bulls would obviously try to get their advantage in The FRONTCOURT with Jordan v.s DJ/Ainge . Jordan would definetly shut them from getting in close to the Paint but Who Really Cares? :confusedshrug: Theyd shut through in PASSES to CELTICS Front-Line and Bird himself. Jordan would have to work hard because DJ was witty and would slow him in the Post and Ainge was fast and could shoot so he would have to run when Ainge comes In.

Bird was a Man that could Play SG-SF and even PF in his Prime. And in that Slow Pace which the Bulls would be forced to Play he would just retreat and force Pippen to Take Shots fron a Distance = not Pippens especiallity. Bird would not be Stopped from Scoring from the outside or Making his Teamats Better. He would also escape from the Pick and Rolls and SCORE Or FEED in PASSES to his FRONTLINE: which would School the Bulls Frontline. And you are not talking abou Any Forward, You Are Talking About the GREATEST PASSING FORWARD, capable for Scoring 29.9 PPG, Rebounding 14 RPG and yes passing 8.2 APG in the Clutch Play-Offs.

I would like to Remined You that Mr Walton was capable even Past His Prime in 1985-86 to get 14 PPG at 56.2% FG and 12.7 RPG per 36 Minutes of Play. And if he could go Against Hakeem and Samson he would even easier to up Against Wennington/Longley or who ever PF-Center they put. Walton was one of the Greast Fundamental and PASSING CENTERS Ever. He could even Make his Teamates Better from that Position Dishing out for AINGE and DJ to Shoot for Open Shots and even in Great Team Work along BIRD-McHALE and PARISH.

The Bulls would suffer what the Lakers suffered rignt now in the 2008 NBA FINALS. Now matter how Bryant, Fisher and Sasha played They Suffered

The Destruction of their FRONTLINE in SCORING, REBOUNDING, FG% and FOUL TROUBLE butl...Let me remined the the BACKCOURT you`d have would be: BIRD-AINGE-DJ :eek:

No Contest!:violin:

What you are saying makes no sense. Every team they played against was a team who they had a better frontcourt then and they never used this lineup except for the Rockets who's frontcourt was almost as good as their own and the Rockets were better at PF and C. The Celtics starters averaged more than 30 minutes a game and Sichting played more than Walton. I have the Celtics '86 Finals series on DVD and have been watching it heavily, their most used lineup was Ainge, Johnson, Bird, McHale and Parish. They were a team heavily reliant on their starters.

[Sir Charles]

What you are saying makes no sense. Every team they played against was a team who they had a better frontcourt then and they never used this lineup except for the Rockets who's frontcourt was almost as good as their own and the Rockets were better at PF and C. The Celtics starters averaged more than 30 minutes a game and Sichting played more than Walton. I have the Celtics '86 Finals series on DVD and have been watching it heavily, their most used lineup was Ainge, Johnson, Bird, McHale and Parish. They were a team heavily reliant on their starters.

And? You are saying they would not use that Line Against the Bulls if it was 1986 Celtics vs 1996 Bulls? The Celtics where forced to Put that Line-Up to SLOW DOWN Hakeeem and Samson which they Succeeded but let me remined you: THEY ALSO SUCCEEDED in DESTROYING the ROCKETS BACKCOURT.:hammerhead: with EFFICIENT Base Linne Shooting with DJ, AINGE, BIRD and WEDMAN

Yes they would use that Line Up :rolleyes:. The Celtics would not try to face the Bulls STRENGTH, Which is the FRONTCOURT: a Faster, more Athletic and Superior in Scoring if the Bulls they decide to put Pippen/Harper and Jordan. They would not Fall in to their GAME OF SUPERIOR BACKOURT of 2 Players .:no:

They would LOOK FOR THE BULLS WEAKNESS which is obviously:

The BULLS 3 FRONTLINE OF (F-PF/C-F AND C) = Which HAS NO SCORING POSSIBILITIES without Kukoc or Pippen: :hammerhead:

But here is the BULLS Trouble. What would Happen if the Bulls put in Pippen or Kukoc in the Frontline as SFs for Improoving their Scoring Possibilites in the Frontline? The Following:

1-If they use Pippen/Kucok in the FRONTLINE. They would WEAKEN THEIR BACKCOURT CREATIVITY and DEFENSE (in Pippens case) which would Make it Easier for DJ/AINGE and BIRD to SCORE.:hammerhead:

By Putting in PIPPEn or Kukoc at the SF Position they Not Only Would Weaken their BACKCOURT CREATIVITY, ASSISTING AND SCORING POSSIBILITIES but also they would: WEAKEN their FRONTLINE DEFENSE. :hammerhead:

Pip was GREAT BASE LINE and 1 on 1 DEFENDER but NOT A GREAT POST DEFNDER AGAINST BIGGER TALLER GUYS (Bird destroyed him in the Post at ages 32 to 34). And Kukoc whom although was Taller at 6`11 ft was an EVEN WEAKER POST DEFENDER. :hammerhead:

It would not be Possilbe for the Bulls to Defend the FRONT LINE without:

ATLEAST 2 CENTER-FORWARD LIKE DUDES of 6-10 ft Plus Presence :confusedshrug: AND ONE VERY STRONG 1 on 1 DEFENDER POWERFORWARD. Which is only RODMAN.

RODMAN will TRY to CONTEND McHALE to Stay Away from the Post (where he has never been succesful) but by doing so he would furthen hismelf from THE REBOUND AREA: Which Would then be an AREA FREE for the domination of PARISH AND WALTON/Kite Whom Already Dominate the PAINT in SCORING and DEFENDING but NOW THEY WOULD HAVE IT EVEN MOR EASIER IN REBOUNDING (without RODMAN in the Post trying to Stop McHale from Getting Close)..

This would also make it for BIRD to Run in And Get Easier Rebounds. A Player Capable of Averaging 9-10 RPG or more in 1986.

2-Then Again by Putting Pippen at the SF Position, already LOSSING their CREATIVE GAME IN THE FRONTCOUR AND OFCOURSE DEFENSIVE GAME they would be forced to Put in PAXON or KERR to Play at the PG Position. Any one of these would have major trouble trying to Guard a PRIME AINGE and PRIME DJ whom where not Only TALLER but BETTER DEFENDERS whom would Make it Hard not Only for KERR/PAXON to SHOOT but Also to PASS

If KERR/PAXON would Try Get Off Shots from PICK and ROLLS they would hardly be succesfull because they would be Guarded by SUPERIOR TALLER and STRONGER DEFENDERS in DJ/AINGE and yes the Celtics would have WALTON-PARSIH and McHALE fighting off those Picks WITH the WEAKER BULLS FRONTLINE.

That same Scheme would happen in the Bulls Court.wwhen the Celtics go for the Score, the would have; PARISH/McHALE/WALTON OR KITE SETTING UP THE PICK AND ROLLS but 6`6 1/2 ft Rodman pretty much WOULD BE CONSUMED & CONCENTRATED in STOPING McHALE and NOT LETTING HIM the POST (AWAY from RODMAN`s REBOUNDING AREA). This would make it EASY FOR BIRD to REBOUND and ASSIST PARISH/WALTON-KITE for EASY BASKETS and ocourse with PAXON/KERR playing the PG position, the Picks would help the FASTER, STRONER AND TALLER AINGE/DJ Go on to the Basket for EASIER HIGHER PERCENTAGE SHOTS.

3- IF they Go with the Harper PG and Jordan SG. Then they would Dominate the BACKOURT as if Pippen was there but it would only be PIPPEN or RODMAN (6`6 1/2 ft and 6`7 ft) in the FRONTLINE.

THAT IS WAY TO SMALL TO CONTEND THE CELTICS BIG 3 and ofcourse THEIR BIG LINE UP with PARISH/McHALE and WALTON

If they bench RODMAN away. They would be Loosing the only GREAT 1 on 1 DEFENDING PERSON in the POST to Guard McHALE and also the ONLY ONE CAPABLE of REBOUNDING OVER THE BIG 3.

If They sit PIPPEN. Then they WOULD LOOSE THEIR SCORING ABILITIES in the FRONTLINE!

See? Its a DOUBLE EDGE SWORD!!!

There is No Way the Bulls can Beat the 1986 CELTICS and Their TALL LINE UP and BIG 3-4 with PARISH at CENTER, WALTON as a 2 Center Piece POINT CF, McHALE at PF as the Second Focal Scoring Point, BIRD at mix of SG/SF loose to Create (Assit, Rebound) and Score from both Inside or Outside, Post and Penetrate...Which the Celtics would use = FORCING THE BULLS TO PLAY THEIR CELTICS HALFCOURT/POST UP SLOW PACE GAME

Not Falling in to the BULLS SUPERIOR BACKCOURT GAME.

Lesson:

Yes a GREAT BACKOURT, Will ALWAYS BEAT AN AVERAGE MEDIOCRE OFFENSIVE FRONTLINE (which is what the Bulls faced in the 90s).

A GREAT BACKCOURT AND A GREAT SCORING FRONTLINE can Beat Almost Anybody. Yes the 1980s LAKERS!

A GREAT FRONTLINE (BIG 3) will ALWAYS BEAT A GREAT BACKCOURT (2)

A GREAT SLOW PACE/POST UP/HIGH SCORING FG% FRONTLINE TEAM, WILL ALWAYS BEAT A GREAT BACKCOURT...

...Proof: What Just Happened in the 2008 NBA FINALS that we Just Saw.:hammerhead:

And Let me Remined you that NOT ONLY WOULD THE CELTICS HAVE A SUPERIOR FRONTELINE AND BIG 3 with PARISH/McHALE/WALTON-KITE and BIRD but also a Tough BACKCOURT with DJ-AINGE and BIRD HIMSELF ALTERNATING the SG and SF Position when they PUT IN THEIR TALL LINE UP OF:

PARISH 7`0 FT (15-19 PPG 55-58% FG, 10-12 RPG, 2.5 BPG)

McHALE 6`10 ft POST SCORING MASTER (19-26 PPG 57-60% FG, 8-9 RPG, 2-2.5 BPG)

WALTON 6`11 POINT-CENTER-FORWARD (capable still of getting 15 ppg, 10 rpg. He averaged 7.6 PPG, 6.8 RPG and 1.3 BPG in JUST 19 MPG in 85-86)

KITE 6-11 ft and 250 lbs CF (BAD WHITE BOY: DEFENDER AND REBOUNDER whom would Chalange RODMAN in parts of the Game)

Who Would be Alternating that SG and SF Position?

BIRD = GREATEST SMALLFORWARD EVER. Yes, A TRIPLE DOUBLE MAN capable of putting these numbers in the Play-Offs = 25/30 PPG, 10-14 RPG and 6-8 ASPG at age 29 before His Back Problems (1989) and WAS THE THE CLUTCHES PERFOMER EVER, ALONG WITH MAGIC. THE 2 PLAYERS CAPABLE OF MAKING THEIR TEAMATEST BETTER THAN ANY

NO CONTEST :confusedshrug:

[Sir Charles]

1980s NBA Rules:rockon: :cheers:

1986 BOSTON CELTICS = GREATEST TEAM EVER. AND THEIR BIG LINE UP

http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/mckale-parrish-bird-johnson-walton.JPG

1980s LAKERS. THE GREATEST RUNNING TEAM EVER. BACK COURT AND FRONT COURT

http://www.latimes.com/media/alternatethumbnails/photo/2006-11/26619922.jpg

http://www.numisgems.com/images/johnsonjordan.jpg

http://www.authenticsportscollectibles.com/store/images/01500_birdphs016028.jpg

http://www.numisgems.com/images/JOHNPHS008001.jpg


THE REAL BIG 3

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/00KfepY9LW397/610x.jpg

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0b0C6Ba6EV8ue/610x.jpg

THE REAL TWIN TOWERS

http://nba.sports.tom.com/uimg/2006/5/29/wangtao/Ralph_Sampson_Hakeem_Olajuwon_2006052900_91853.jpg

[1987_Lakers]

http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/image/1982/10/10/001301997.jpg

http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/838/9091playoffsfinalspistolx4.jpg

[Sir Charles]

http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/838/9091playoffsfinalspistolx4.jpg


Back When Handchecking Rules and Real Fauls Where Something Common:applause:

[Sir Charles]

Back when Powerforwards Had Natural Strength, Could Run and Be Agressive:)

http://www.nba.com/media/malone_320_barkley.jpg

http://www.nba.com/media/espanol/malone_rodman.jpg

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0fxW24F8dp6YU/610x.jpg

[nycelt84]

And? You are saying they would not use that Line Against the Bulls if it was 1986 Celtics vs 1996 Bulls? The Celtics where forced to Put that Line-Up to SLOW DOWN Hakeeem and Samson which they Succeeded but let me remined you: THEY ALSO SUCCEEDED in DESTROYING the ROCKETS BACKCOURT.:hammerhead: with EFFICIENT Base Linne Shooting with DJ, AINGE, BIRD and WEDMAN

Yes they would use that Line Up :rolleyes:. The Celtics would not try to face the Bulls STRENGTH, Which is the FRONTCOURT: a Faster, more Athletic and Superior in Scoring if the Bulls they decide to put Pippen/Harper and Jordan. They would not Fall in to their GAME OF SUPERIOR BACKOURT of 2 Players .:no:

They would LOOK FOR THE BULLS WEAKNESS which is obviously:

The BULLS 3 FRONTLINE OF (F-PF/C-F AND C) = Which HAS NO SCORING POSSIBILITIES without Kukoc or Pippen: :hammerhead:

But here is the BULLS Trouble. What would Happen if the Bulls put in Pippen or Kukoc in the Frontline as SFs for Improoving their Scoring Possibilites in the Frontline? The Following:

1-If they use Pippen/Kucok in the FRONTLINE. They would WEAKEN THEIR BACKCOURT CREATIVITY and DEFENSE (in Pippens case) which would Make it Easier for DJ/AINGE and BIRD to SCORE.:hammerhead:

By Putting in PIPPEn or Kukoc at the SF Position they Not Only Would Weaken their BACKCOURT CREATIVITY, ASSISTING AND SCORING POSSIBILITIES but also they would: WEAKEN their FRONTLINE DEFENSE. :hammerhead:

Pip was GREAT BASE LINE and 1 on 1 DEFENDER but NOT A GREAT POST DEFNDER AGAINST BIGGER TALLER GUYS (Bird destroyed him in the Post at ages 32 to 34). And Kukoc whom although was Taller at 6`11 ft was an EVEN WEAKER POST DEFENDER. :hammerhead:

It would not be Possilbe for the Bulls to Defend the FRONT LINE without:

ATLEAST 2 CENTER-FORWARD LIKE DUDES of 6-10 ft Plus Presence :confusedshrug: AND ONE VERY STRONG 1 on 1 DEFENDER POWERFORWARD. Which is only RODMAN.

RODMAN will TRY to CONTEND McHALE to Stay Away from the Post (where he has never been succesful) but by doing so he would furthen hismelf from THE REBOUND AREA: Which Would then be an AREA FREE for the domination of PARISH AND WALTON/Kite Whom Already Dominate the PAINT in SCORING and DEFENDING but NOW THEY WOULD HAVE IT EVEN MOR EASIER IN REBOUNDING (without RODMAN in the Post trying to Stop McHale from Getting Close)..

This would also make it for BIRD to Run in And Get Easier Rebounds. A Player Capable of Averaging 9-10 RPG or more in 1986.

2-Then Again by Putting Pippen at the SF Position, already LOSSING their CREATIVE GAME IN THE FRONTCOUR AND OFCOURSE DEFENSIVE GAME they would be forced to Put in PAXON or KERR to Play at the PG Position. Any one of these would have major trouble trying to Guard a PRIME AINGE and PRIME DJ whom where not Only TALLER but BETTER DEFENDERS whom would Make it Hard not Only for KERR/PAXON to SHOOT but Also to PASS

If KERR/PAXON would Try Get Off Shots from PICK and ROLLS they would hardly be succesfull because they would be Guarded by SUPERIOR TALLER and STRONGER DEFENDERS in DJ/AINGE and yes the Celtics would have WALTON-PARSIH and McHALE fighting off those Picks WITH the WEAKER BULLS FRONTLINE.

That same Scheme would happen in the Bulls Court.wwhen the Celtics go for the Score, the would have; PARISH/McHALE/WALTON OR KITE SETTING UP THE PICK AND ROLLS but 6`6 1/2 ft Rodman pretty much WOULD BE CONSUMED & CONCENTRATED in STOPING McHALE and NOT LETTING HIM the POST (AWAY from RODMAN`s REBOUNDING AREA). This would make it EASY FOR BIRD to REBOUND and ASSIST PARISH/WALTON-KITE for EASY BASKETS and ocourse with PAXON/KERR playing the PG position, the Picks would help the FASTER, STRONER AND TALLER AINGE/DJ Go on to the Basket for EASIER HIGHER PERCENTAGE SHOTS.

3- IF they Go with the Harper PG and Jordan SG. Then they would Dominate the BACKOURT as if Pippen was there but it would only be PIPPEN or RODMAN (6`6 1/2 ft and 6`7 ft) in the FRONTLINE.

THAT IS WAY TO SMALL TO CONTEND THE CELTICS BIG 3 and ofcourse THEIR BIG LINE UP with PARISH/McHALE and WALTON

If they bench RODMAN away. They would be Loosing the only GREAT 1 on 1 DEFENDING PERSON in the POST to Guard McHALE and also the ONLY ONE CAPABLE of REBOUNDING OVER THE BIG 3.

If They sit PIPPEN. Then they WOULD LOOSE THEIR SCORING ABILITIES in the FRONTLINE!

See? Its a DOUBLE EDGE SWORD!!!

There is No Way the Bulls can Beat the 1986 CELTICS and Their TALL LINE UP and BIG 3-4 with PARISH at CENTER, WALTON as a 2 Center Piece POINT CF, McHALE at PF as the Second Focal Scoring Point, BIRD at mix of SG/SF loose to Create (Assit, Rebound) and Score from both Inside or Outside, Post and Penetrate...Which the Celtics would use = FORCING THE BULLS TO PLAY THEIR CELTICS HALFCOURT/POST UP SLOW PACE GAME

Not Falling in to the BULLS SUPERIOR BACKCOURT GAME.

Lesson:

Yes a GREAT BACKOURT, Will ALWAYS BEAT AN AVERAGE MEDIOCRE OFFENSIVE FRONTLINE (which is what the Bulls faced in the 90s).

A GREAT BACKCOURT AND A GREAT SCORING FRONTLINE can Beat Almost Anybody. Yes the 1980s LAKERS!

A GREAT FRONTLINE (BIG 3) will ALWAYS BEAT A GREAT BACKCOURT (2)

A GREAT SLOW PACE/POST UP/HIGH SCORING FG% FRONTLINE TEAM, WILL ALWAYS BEAT A GREAT BACKCOURT...

...Proof: What Just Happened in the 2008 NBA FINALS that we Just Saw.:hammerhead:

And Let me Remined you that NOT ONLY WOULD THE CELTICS HAVE A SUPERIOR FRONTELINE AND BIG 3 with PARISH/McHALE/WALTON-KITE and BIRD but also a Tough BACKCOURT with DJ-AINGE and BIRD HIMSELF ALTERNATING the SG and SF Position when they PUT IN THEIR TALL LINE UP OF:

PARISH 7`0 FT (15-19 PPG 55-58% FG, 10-12 RPG, 2.5 BPG)

McHALE 6`10 ft POST SCORING MASTER (19-26 PPG 57-60% FG, 8-9 RPG, 2-2.5 BPG)

WALTON 6`11 POINT-CENTER-FORWARD (capable still of getting 15 ppg, 10 rpg. He averaged 7.6 PPG, 6.8 RPG and 1.3 BPG in JUST 19 MPG in 85-86)

KITE 6-11 ft and 250 lbs CF (BAD WHITE BOY: DEFENDER AND REBOUNDER whom would Chalange RODMAN in parts of the Game)

Who Would be Alternating that SG and SF Position?

BIRD = GREATEST SMALLFORWARD EVER. Yes, A TRIPLE DOUBLE MAN capable of putting these numbers in the Play-Offs = 25/30 PPG, 10-14 RPG and 6-8 ASPG at age 29 before His Back Problems (1989) and WAS THE THE CLUTCHES PERFOMER EVER, ALONG WITH MAGIC. THE 2 PLAYERS CAPABLE OF MAKING THEIR TEAMATEST BETTER THAN ANY

NO CONTEST :confusedshrug:

I'm not KC Jones and you're not KC Jones so all your talk of would is foolish nobody knows what the coach would do. All your talk would never convince me that a team that gave its starters over 30 minutes per game for an entire season would suddenly change to a different lineup makes no sense.

[nycelt84]

Double post.

[97 bulls]

Just because they didn't make the Finals doesn't mean they shouldn't be discussed. They still had 3 HOFers.:roll:

I'm sorry but the Celtics and Lakers bench players were former All stars, DPOY, and former MVPs.

Kevin McHale: Celtics 6th man 1981-1984. HOF player
Michael Cooper: 1987 DPOY
Bob McAdoo: 5 time all star. 1975 NBA MVP. HOF
Mychal Thompson: 1st pick of the 1978 NBA Draft. 20/10 player in '82.
Bill Walton: 1978 NBA MVP. 1986 Sixth Man. HOF
Scott Wedman: 1 time NBA All Star

To even compare guys like Tonu Kukoc, Steve Kerr, and Brian Williams to the Celtics-Lakers bench is laughable. :roll

That was seriously one of the dumbest arguments i've ever heard.


kevin mchale was a starter in 86
ill give you coop
mcadoo was old and washed up in 85 and wasnt on the 87 lakers (which team are you arguing for 85 86 87 88 you keep jumping around)
mychal thompson was solid in 87-88 as a bench player
same with walton
same with wedman
the 97 bulls players were all in their primes and the best players on other teams and came to the bulls to play a role.

but you gave me 6 bench players on 4 different teams, i gave you 3 bench players on 1 team. let me help you.



the 87 lakers main bench players were thompson, coop, and rambis
the 85 lakers main bench players were mcadoo, wilkes, coop
the 86 celtics main bench players were wedman, walton, sichting

[97 bulls]

LOL @ Pippen being "very close" to Bird. :oldlol: There are only about 7-8 players in history who you could say that about, and Pippen is not only not one of them, he's not anywhere near the conversation.

like ive stated before, when basketball is only played on 1 side of the ball ill agree with people like you and 87 lakers. but since you have to play defense too and pippen is regarded as one of the top 3 perimeter defenders ever and could score and rebound etc. im sayn their close with an advantage to bird and his ability to make clutch baskets. even though i would pick pippen over bird every day of the week and twice on sunday if i needed a defensive stop.

[97 bulls]

I'd put him in the top 5 with MJ, Magic, Wilt, and Kareem. And he is without a doubt the greatest SF of all time.

Pippen on the other hand might not be a top 5 SF. I have Bird, Havlicek, Barry, Baylor, and Erving ahead of Pippen.

and you know whats funny about your list of top 5 alltime SFs? everyone of those guys would not put up the numbers they put up if they were playing second to jordan. not to mention, pippen is closer to those guys in scoring than than they are to pippen defensively and thats 50 % of the game. i would say that pip is about 80 percent the scorer those players are as a second option playing in a structured offense and a slower tempo. and all those players are about 60 percent of pip defensively.

[guy]

like ive stated before, when basketball is only played on 1 side of the ball ill agree with people like you and 87 lakers. but since you have to play defense too and pippen is regarded as one of the top 3 perimeter defenders ever and could score and rebound etc. im sayn their close with an advantage to bird and his ability to make clutch baskets. even though i would pick pippen over bird every day of the week and twice on sunday if i needed a defensive stop.

Sorry I would have to disagree with you. Put prime Pippen in place of Bird on the Celtics, and they probably never win a title. Put prime Bird in place of Pippen on the Bulls, and they never lose more then 10 games a year, and they might still win the title that year Jordan retired. Defense is more about the structure of the team, and I think its much harder to be a great offensive player then great defensive player. If you really think Pippen is close to Bird, would you say Bruce Bowen or Shane Battier are close to as valuable as Carmelo Anthony or Steve Nash? Cause there's probably about 30 head coaches in the league that would say no.

[97 bulls]

Sorry I would have to disagree with you. Put prime Pippen in place of Bird on the Celtics, and they probably never win a title. Put prime Bird in place of Pippen on the Bulls, and they never lose more then 10 games a year, and they might still win the title that year Jordan retired. Defense is more about the structure of the team, and I think its much harder to be a great offensive player then great defensive player. If you really think Pippen is close to Bird, would you say Bruce Bowen or Shane Battier are close to as valuable as Carmelo Anthony or Steve Nash? Cause there's probably about 30 head coaches in the league that would say no.

to answer your bowen battier question NO, although in bowens case if you can take the other teams best scorer and make him a volume shooter or virtually non-existant id say thats equal to a player scoring 25 points .

not to mention in all sports the better defensive team almost always win out in the end. look at new england and new york in the super bowl. look at the lakers and celtics, or how about san antonio and phoenix. and i dont agree that bird instead of pippen on those bulls helps against magic in 91, or kevin jhnson in 93 or peyton or mark jackson. even when pippen wasnt defending those guys it was like he was because of his ability to hinder an oppositions offensive scheme. and its definately harder to be a great defensive player than offensive player. for every 1 great defensive player you name ill give you six offensive players scoring 20 or more points a night. offense is more glamerous. a good coach will say that the object of basketball is to score more than the opponent a championship coach will tell you that the object is to keep the opponent from scoring more than you.

[1987_Lakers]

kevin mchale was a starter in 86
ill give you coop
mcadoo was old and washed up in 85 and wasnt on the 87 lakers (which team are you arguing for 85 86 87 88 you keep jumping around)
mychal thompson was solid in 87-88 as a bench player
same with walton
same with wedman
the 97 bulls players were all in their primes and the best players on other teams and came to the bulls to play a role.

but you gave me 6 bench players on 4 different teams, i gave you 3 bench players on 1 team. let me help you.



the 87 lakers main bench players were thompson, coop, and rambis
the 85 lakers main bench players were mcadoo, wilkes, coop
the 86 celtics main bench players were wedman, walton, sichting

Steve Kerr was nothing more than a shooter. And Brian Williams only played 9 games all year for the '97 Bulls. and only averaged 6 PPG during the playoffs. Those guys don't compare to Cooper, McAdoo, & Thompson.

McAdoo might of been past his prime by 1985 but he was still putting up over 10 PPG while shooting over 50% FG.

[willds09]

Let me take u back to tha 90s tha best decade, that's whea tha real ballers played, whea greats like mj did his thang, had dummies going tha other way, and tha knicks went to tha finals twice, how mj had 6 rings, and made mark price pay tha price, many many times, hakeem finally got that piece of tha pie, tha beginning of kobe and ai, and how tha spurs beat tha knicks that brought tears to my eyes, when miller always shine in tha due or die, and when shaq's fat ass broke tha glass, 90s was a blast!

[97 bulls]

Steve Kerr was nothing more than a shooter. And Brian Williams only played 9 games all year for the '97 Bulls. and only averaged 6 PPG during the playoffs. Those guys don't compare to Cooper, McAdoo, & Thompson.

McAdoo might of been past his prime by 1985 but he was still putting up over 10 PPG while shooting over 50% FG.
id pick a 28 year old williams over an old mcadoo. and that all kerr needed to do was shoot. that was his job and thats what they paid him to do. and he was great at it. and yeah he was puting up those numbers in a faster pace league normalize it to 90s pace and it probably about 5 ppg.

[97 bulls]

Let me take u back to tha 90s tha best decade, that's whea tha real ballers played, whea greats like mj did his thang, had dummies going tha other way, and tha knicks went to tha finals twice, how mj had 6 rings, and made mark price pay tha price, many many times, hakeem finally got that piece of tha pie, tha beginning of kobe and ai, and how tha spurs beat tha knicks that brought tears to my eyes, when miller always shine in tha due or die, and when shaq's fat ass broke tha glass, 90s was a blast!
funny

[1987_Lakers]

Let me take u back to tha 90s tha best decade, that's whea tha real ballers played, whea greats like mj did his thang, had dummies going tha other way, and tha knicks went to tha finals twice, how mj had 6 rings, and made mark price pay tha price, many many times, hakeem finally got that piece of tha pie, tha beginning of kobe and ai, and how tha spurs beat tha knicks that brought tears to my eyes, when miller always shine in tha due or die, and when shaq's fat ass broke tha glass, 90s was a blast!

ENGLISH MOTHER ****ER! DO YOU SPEAK IT!?!?!?!?!

http://www.weeklyfilm.com/images/Moviepics/jules.gif

[1987_Lakers]

id pick a 28 year old williams over an old mcadoo. and that all kerr needed to do was shoot. that was his job and thats what they paid him to do. and he was great at it. and yeah he was puting up those numbers in a faster pace league normalize it to 90s pace and it probably about 5 ppg.

I disagree. The Bulls didn't even need Williams. McAdoo was better offensivly.

[Loki]

Sorry I would have to disagree with you. Put prime Pippen in place of Bird on the Celtics, and they probably never win a title. Put prime Bird in place of Pippen on the Bulls, and they never lose more then 10 games a year, and they might still win the title that year Jordan retired. Defense is more about the structure of the team, and I think its much harder to be a great offensive player then great defensive player. If you really think Pippen is close to Bird, would you say Bruce Bowen or Shane Battier are close to as valuable as Carmelo Anthony or Steve Nash? Cause there's probably about 30 head coaches in the league that would say no.

B..b...but DEFENSE !!!!111oneone :oldlol:

[97 bulls]

I disagree. The Bulls didn't even need Williams. McAdoo was better offensivly.
not at 33 he wasnt. i live in la i remember the 80s lakers your not talking to a young kid

[1987_Lakers]

not at 33 he wasnt. i live in la i remember the 80s lakers your not talking to a young kid

Williams didn't even do much as a Bull why would i put him ahead of a HOFer? Who averaged 10 PPG, 4.5 RPG, and shot over 50 FG%.

The lakers bench in '85 was wayyyyyyy deeper than the Bulls bench in '87

'85 Lakers Bench
Bob McAdoo
Michael Cooper
Mike McGee
Jamaal Wilkes
Mitch Kupchak
Larry Spriggs

NOW THAT IS A DEEP BENCH!!!!

[97 bulls]

Williams didn't even do much as a Bull why would i put him ahead of a HOFer? Who averaged 10 PPG, 4.5 RPG, and shot over 50 FG%.

The lakers bench in '85 was wayyyyyyy deeper than the Bulls bench in '87

'85 Lakers Bench
Bob McAdoo
Michael Cooper
Mike McGee
Jamaal Wilkes
Mitch Kupchak
Kurt Rambis
Larry Spriggs

NOW THAT IS A DEEP BENCH!!!!
yeah, i think the 85 lakers have one of the best benches ever. but i still think brian williams and kukoc would be the best players out of all those guys you mentioned. at that particular time of the age of the 85 lakers bench. and kerr is far and away the best shooter. and please stop jumping years. its like me saying the 97 bulls are better because jordan averaged 37 ppg in 87 8 rbds and 8 ast in 89 and about 2 blks a game in 87. it makes no sense.

[1987_Lakers]

yeah, i think the 85 lakers have one of the best benches ever. but i still think brian williams and kukoc would be the best players out of all those guys you mentioned. at that particular time of the age of the 85 lakers bench. and kerr is far and away the best shooter. and please stop jumping years. its like me saying the 97 bulls are better because jordan averaged 37 ppg in 87 8 rbds and 8 ast in 89 and about 2 blks a game in 87. it makes no sense.

Williams better than Cooper??? LOL:roll:

[willds09]

ENGLISH MOTHER ****ER! DO YOU SPEAK IT!?!?!?!?!

http://www.weeklyfilm.com/images/Moviepics/jules.gif
Lmao ebonics man that's all lol

[97 bulls]

Williams better than Cooper??? LOL:roll:
i d give the edge to coop due to him being a beast defensively. i really feel that coop could have been a 15-16 ppg scorer if he started. but i also feel williams would have been a 20 10 guy if he was able to start earlier in his career. remember, he was playn behind shaq and mutombo.

[97 bulls]

I disagree. The Bulls didn't even need Williams. McAdoo was better offensivly.
better to have him and not need him than to need him and not have him.

[1987_Lakers]

Lmao ebonics man that's all lol

lol. i know

[97 bulls]

another point i would like to make is, from the 50s to now there has always been a dominate team or two a "dynasty" that has ruled an era. \

in the 50s it was minneapolis in the 60s it was boston, in the 80s it was the lakers and celtics. the pistons in the late 80s early 90s. in the 90s it was the bulls and rockets and in this decade, it is the spurs and lakers and through the years all those teams had to overcome an established team in order to assert themselves as the dominate team in the league. the only era to not have that is the 80s lakers and celtics. why? because the 70s had no dynasty. if there was a dominate team that was wininng in the 70s to carry over in the 80s i think magic and bird would be minus a couple of titles.

[1987_Lakers]

another point i would like to make is, from the 50s to now there has always been a dominate team or two a "dynasty" that has ruled an era. \

in the 50s it was minneapolis in the 60s it was boston, in the 80s it was the lakers and celtics. the pistons in the late 80s early 90s. in the 90s it was the bulls and rockets and in this decade, it is the spurs and lakers and through the years all those teams had to overcome an established team in order to assert themselves as the dominate team in the league. the only era to not have that is the 80s lakers and celtics. why? because the 70s had no dynasty. if there was a dominate team that was wininng in the 70s to carry over in the 80s i think magic and bird would be minus a couple of titles.

Actually the Seattle Supersonics made the NBA Finals in 1978 and 1979. Winning the championship in 1979. In 1980 they were still one of the best teams in the NBA They even won more games in 1980 than in 1979 and they made it to the WCF. But the Lakers beat the Sonics in five games to advance to the NBA Finals.

If there was a dynasty in the 70's it would not carry over to the 80's. There were bad teams in that decade. A 42-40 Suns team made the Finals in '76. A Warriors team who only won 48 games won the title in '75. In 1978 the Washington Bullets won only 44 games and went on the be NBA Champs. The 70's was a horrible time for the NBA. It was IMO the worst decade in NBA History. And the teams who won a championship from '74-'79 wouldn't stand a chance vs Magic's Lakers and Bird's Celtics.

[97 bulls]

Actually the Seattle Supersonics made the NBA Finals in 1978 and 1979. Winning the championship in 1979. In 1980 they were still one of the best teams in the NBA They even won more games in 1980 than in 1979 and they made it to the WCF. But the Lakers beat the Sonics in five games to advance to the NBA Finals.

If there was a dynasty in the 70's it would not carry over to the 80's. There were bad teams in that decade. A 42-40 Suns team made the Finals in '76. A Warriors team who only won 48 games won the title in '75. In 1978 the Washington Bullets won only 44 games and went on the be NBA Champs. The 70's was a horrible time for the NBA. It was IMO the worst decade in NBA History. And the teams who won a championship from '74-'79 wouldn't stand a chance vs Magic's Lakers and Bird's Celtics.
we finally agree on something:cheers:

[guy]

to answer your bowen battier question NO, although in bowens case if you can take the other teams best scorer and make him a volume shooter or virtually non-existant id say thats equal to a player scoring 25 points.

Yea and its more likely for a guy like Carmelo to score 25 points in a given night then Bowen to make the best scorer non-existant.



not to mention in all sports the better defensive team almost always win out in the end. look at new england and new york in the super bowl. look at the lakers and celtics, or how about san antonio and phoenix.

Yes, and tell me how many average offenses with great defenses have won championships? All championship teams need to be great on both ends of the court. San Antonio and Boston have been two of the best defensive teams, but they have also been two of the best offensive teams. The Lakers and Phoenix can only say that about offense.



and i dont agree that bird instead of pippen on those bulls helps against magic in 91, or kevin jhnson in 93 or peyton or mark jackson. even when pippen wasnt defending those guys it was like he was because of his ability to hinder an oppositions offensive scheme.

First of all, the team would've probably been built a little differently around Jordan/Bird instead of Jordan/Pippen. Maybe the Bulls focus on getting a better interior defender. The Bulls would still be a good defensive team, especially with players like Jordan, Grant, Rodman, and Harper. They'd probably still be better defensively then any of those teams you just mentioned except for maybe Seattle, but there's really no way of telling, caus e like I said, the Bulls would probably be built a little differently. But the Bulls would be WORLDS ahead of any of those teams offensively. There's no way any of those teams, and maybe any team in history, are shutting down and outscoring a team led by Jordan and Bird in a best of 7 series.



and its definately harder to be a great defensive player than offensive player. for every 1 great defensive player you name ill give you six offensive players scoring 20 or more points a night. offense is more glamerous. a good coach will say that the object of basketball is to score more than the opponent a championship coach will tell you that the object is to keep the opponent from scoring more than you.

Yes offense is more glamorous, which is why you see more players trying to be great scorers then great defenders, which is why there are more of them, not cause its easier. Great scorers have more impact then great defenders. For example, a great scorer with bad defense and horrible teammates is more likely to give his team better chances at winning games then a great defender with bad offense and horrible teammates.

[1987_Lakers]

Damn....wrong thread.

[Sir Charles]

Lakers_87...stop putting McHale over Barkley in the 80s....

Barkley has been a Top 5 PER both Season and Play-Offs since 1985-86 to 1989-90

[Hoopz2332]

80's stats are crazy inflated

[feyki]

:oldlol: there's no debate .

[72-10]

OP since Penny could do what Pip did, but was a better offensive player, I'd consider replacing 93-94 Pip with 95-96 Penny.

[72-10]

80's stats are crazy inflated

No, they're not. In fact assists were much harder to receive due credit for.

[Trollsmasher]

plumbers vs postmen

[72-10]

plumbers vs postmen

you can talk all the era bullshit you want to, but if you haven't played the game then you can't see how 80s and 90s stars would thrive in today's league