80's vs 90's

[1987_Lakers]

I've been messing around on whatifsports and i made a team from the 80's and 90's.

80's
C - 82-83 Moses Malone
PF - 86-87 Kevin McHale
SF - 85-86 Larry Bird
SG - 87-88 Michael Jordan
PG - 86-87 Magic Johnson
BENCH
84-85 Isiah Thomas
88-89 Clyde Drexler
80-81 Julius Erving
85-86 Dominique Wilkins
79-80 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
88-89 Hakeem Olajuwon
87-88 Charles Barkley

90's
C - 93-94 Hakeem Olajuwon
PF - 90-91 Karl Malone
SF - 93-94 Scottie Pippen
SG - 90-91 Michael Jordan
PG - 90-91 John Stockton
BENCH
95-96 Gary Payton
91-92 Clyde Drexler
92-93 Charles Barkley
93-94 David Robinson
91-92 Reggie Miller
96-97 Grant Hill
98-99 Shaquille O'Neal

So far i've simulated these two teams against each other 4 times. And all 4 times the 80's won.

Who do you guys think would win?

[BrianScalabrine]

The 90s is the 2nd most overrated era after the 00s, so I vote for the 80s.

[L.Kizzle]

All but three players from your '90 list played in the '80s so that should tell you which era was better and who'd win.

[ConanRulesNBC]

The 90s is the 2nd most overrated era after the 00s, so I vote for the 80s.

How was the '90s overrated?

[1987_Lakers]

How was the '90s overrated?

I can see why people think the 90's were overrated. The early 90's were good but the mid 90's - late 90's were really watterd down.

[ConanRulesNBC]

Late '90s maybe... but the early/mid '90s were great.

[Manute for Ever!]

Late '90s maybe... but the early/mid '90s were great.

The '90's were cool until Vancouver and Toronto came in (no intention dis', Raps and Griz fans). You know how it is when the bring in expansion teams....

[1987_Lakers]

Late '90s maybe... but the early/mid '90s were great.

It was actually the mid 90's where the NBA started to sink. MJ wasn't in the NBA in 93-94 & 94-95 then when MJ came back in 95-96 the NBA added 2 new teams to the NBA which lowerd competition a bit.

[LBJ 4 MVP]

Well are you going to sim a series or not?

[crisoner]

80's.....no contest.

[1987_Lakers]

Sorry, the departure of one player can't bring the level of the play down for the entire league, even if it is Michael Jordan. The fact is, the mid 90s is the greatest era for the center position in NBA history, so I don't understand how it can be classified as weak.

And since when does more teams mean a weaker league? Does that mean that the mid 40s was the strongest era ever because it was the era with the fewest teams in the league?

Well, you have more players spread out. Instead of having 3 great players on a team you know might have 2. Just look at the 80's. You had a bunch of great players on one team. As the NBA expanded competition got worse.

[ConanRulesNBC]

lol... I know. I mean you still had very good Rockets, Magic, Knicks, Jazz, Sonics and Bulls teams. How many players that were on the Grizzlies and Raptors could have gone to other teams and all of a sudden make them contenders? It didn't cause the NBA to be weaker at all. In fact... I think the 72-10 Bulls actually lost to the Raptors.

The '90s were awesome.

Oh and I'm going with the '90s.

Prime Jordan who played team basketball paired up with Pippen, Hakeem, Stockton and Malone with Shaq off the bench? Bird and Magic were great but '90s Jordan would have beaten '80s Jordan in a team game, Kareem was passed his prime and going up against Shaq and a prime Hakeem would have been hard. Also that bench for the '90s team is just absolutely sick.

[bladefd]

I wouldn't put McHale over Charles Barkley/MosesMalone for the 80s. IMO, Hakeem could have played PF too. He was versatile enough to defend both PFs and Cs in his prime. I personally think McHale was slightly overrated on both ends of the court. :confusedshrug:

For the 90's, you can also do Shaq for C and Hakeem for PF instead of Karl Malone. Malone was a beast but I think a Shaq/Hakeem duo would be basically unstoppable front-court for the 90s.

[1987_Lakers]

lol... I know. I mean you still had very good Rockets, Magic, Knicks, Jazz, Sonics and Bulls teams. How many players that were on the Grizzlies and Raptors could have gone to other teams and all of a sudden make them contenders? It didn't cause the NBA to be weaker at all. In fact... I think the 72-10 Bulls actually lost to the Raptors.

The '90s were awesome.

Oh and I'm going with the '90s.

Prime Jordan who played team basketball paired up with Pippen, Hakeem, Stockton and Malone with Shaq off the bench? Bird and Magic were great but '90s Jordan would have beaten '80s Jordan in a team game, Kareem was passed his prime and going up against Shaq and a prime Hakeem would have been hard. Also that bench for the '90s team is just absolutely sick.

Well you do have MJ and Hakeem for the 80's. And you say Shaq coming off the bench. Well how about Isiah Thomas, Hakeem, MVP '81 Julius Erving and MVP '82 Moses Malone coming off the bench. And this is 1980 Kareem... we are talking about the NBA MVP for that year. Reggie Miller, Gary Payton, and Grant Hill wouldn't even make the roster for the 80's squad if they played in that decade. No doubt the bench is better for the 80's squad.

[1987_Lakers]

Okay, will you please tell me what players the 1995-96 Raptors and the 1995-96 Grizzlies took from the other teams in the league to lower the standard of the entire league? The best players the Raptors took from other teams in the NBA were Doug Christie, Tracy Murray and Oliver Miller; and the best players Grizzlies took from other teams were Greg Anthony, Blue Edwards, Benoit Benjamin and a 34 year-old Byron Scott. Not a single one compares to Gerald Wallace that Bobcats got when they entered the league.

So apparently, according to you, the fact that a handful of mediocre players such as these got transferred to two expansion teams somehow made the league less competitive because the players became spread out. Wow.

Seriously the NBA was watterd down in 1996 when u compare it to the mid 1980's. Just look at the Cavs for '96. They made the playoffs with a starting 5 of Terrell Brandon / Michael Cage / Danny Ferry / Chris Mills / Bobby Phills.

It wasn't just 2 teams that were added in '96 that watterd down the NBA. In 1988-89 the NBA added 2 teams and another 2 teams in 1989-90. And 2 more in 1995-96. 6 teams were added in the NBA in a span of 8 years. That weakens competition.

[guy]

Okay, will you please tell me what players the 1995-96 Raptors and the 1995-96 Grizzlies took from the other teams in the league to lower the standard of the entire league? The best players the Raptors took from other teams in the NBA were Doug Christie, Tracy Murray and Oliver Miller; and the best players Grizzlies took from other teams were Greg Anthony, Blue Edwards, Benoit Benjamin and a 34 year-old Byron Scott. Not a single one compares to Gerald Wallace that Bobcats got when they entered the league.

So apparently, according to you, the fact that a handful of mediocre players such as these got transferred to two expansion teams somehow made the league less competitive because the players became spread out. Wow.

:applause: Another flaw in the whole argument that the 90s and 00s are watered down compared to other eras is that people don't take into account that as the league expanded, the whole basketball population expanded, Basketball has gotten more popular, meaning more people playing the sport, meaning more competition as a whole. Its gotten so popular that the US hasn't won a gold medal in 8 years.

[1987_Lakers]

:applause: Another flaw in the whole argument that the 90s and 00s are watered down compared to other eras is that people don't take into account that as the league expanded, the whole basketball population expanded, Basketball has gotten more popular, meaning more people playing the sport, meaning more competition as a whole. Its gotten so popular that the US hasn't won a gold medal in 8 years.

That should tell you how bad the NBA is now compared to the 80's / 90's.

[1987_Lakers]

whatifsports simulation: 80's vs 90's

Game 1
80's: 126
90's 96
Player of the Game: Kevin McHale

Game 2
80's: 110
90's: 102
Player of the Game: Magic Johnson

Game 3
80's: 115
90's: 108
Player of the Game: Magic Johnson

Game 4
80's: 110
90's 111
Player of the Game: Hakeem Olajuwon (90's)

Game 5
80's: 107
90's: 95
Player of the Game: Larry Bird

80's win series 4-1

Note: 80's out rebounded the 90's by 10+ during the series.

[L.Kizzle]

whatifsports simulation: 80's vs 90's
Note: 80's out rebounded the 90's by 10+ during the series.
Of course they would. Everyone on the '80 besides Zeke has averaged 8 boards or more in a season.

[97 bulls]

its funny how people always say that the 90s is overrated. i mean, how can it be overrated when the fact is, basketball was at its peak. its also funny when people say that the league was watered down but have no substance for such an argument.

the whole waterd down theory is funny because there was still plenty of talented basketall players playing in the 90s. all teams still had a big three but some were better than others just like the 80s.now, if the 90s had teams like the bulls being put out by teams like the grizzlies i would say that the 90s were overrated. and oh by the way that did happen in the 80s to the mighty lakers. the 80s had very bad teams making the playoffs and beating championship teams. they had a bunch of crack heads playing in the 80s also.

[97 bulls]

That should tell you how bad the NBA is now compared to the 80's / 90's.

all the 90s dream teams won the gold

[97 bulls]

whatifsports simulation: 80's vs 90's

Game 1
80's: 126
90's 96
Player of the Game: Kevin McHale

Game 2
80's: 110
90's: 102
Player of the Game: Magic Johnson

Game 3
80's: 115
90's: 108
Player of the Game: Magic Johnson

Game 4
80's: 110
90's 111
Player of the Game: Hakeem Olajuwon (90's)

Game 5
80's: 107
90's: 95
Player of the Game: Larry Bird

80's win series 4-1

Note: 80's out rebounded the 90's by 10+ during the series.

that thing goes strictly by stats and is unrealistic. you should be ashamed for posting this.

[1987_Lakers]

its funny how people always say that the 90s is overrated. i mean, how can it be overrated when the fact is, basketball was at its peak. its also funny when people say that the league was watered down but have no substance for such an argument.

the whole waterd down theory is funny because there was still plenty of talented basketall players playing in the 90s. all teams still had a big three but some were better than others just like the 80s.now, if the 90s had teams like the bulls being put out by teams like the grizzlies i would say that the 90s were overrated. and oh by the way that did happen in the 80s to the mighty lakers. the 80s had very bad teams making the playoffs and beating championship teams. they had a bunch of crack heads playing in the 80s also.

:lol

Maybe the 80's had bad teams making the playoffs because 16 teams made the playoffs when there were only 23 teams in the nba.

Do some reserach before you post.

And most NBA Fans will tell you the NBA was at its best in the 80's. People like you is what's making the 90's overrated.

[guy]

That should tell you how bad the NBA is now compared to the 80's / 90's.

No that just means the game beyond the US has improved greatly, and also the NBA players don't want to play for the US as much as they did in 92, the first year NBA players were playing. And that was just an example, the popularity hasn't just increased outside of the US. Its also increased greatly in the US, making it more competitive amongst Americans. Combine that with the rise of the international game, and basketball is just more competitive, and it basically correlates with the expansion of the NBA.

[97 bulls]

:lol

Maybe the 80's had bad teams making the playoffs because 16 teams made the playoffs when there were only 23 teams in the nba.

Do some reserach before you post.

And most NBA Fans will tell you the NBA was at its best in the 80's. People like you is what's making the 90's overrated.

man, i dont care how many teams were in the league. under 500 is under 500 period. and the fact is under 500 teams should not be advancing and beating the so called championship or gretest teams ever.

and YOU NEED TO DO RESEARCH, cuz the fact is that the nba ratings were at its highest in the 90s. which means more people were watching.

[97 bulls]

No that just means the game beyond the US has improved greatly, and also the NBA players don't want to play for the US as much as they did in 92, the first year NBA players were playing. And that was just an example, the popularity hasn't just increased outside of the US. Its also increased greatly in the US, making it more competitive amongst Americans. Combine that with the rise of the international game, and basketball is just more competitive, and it basically correlates with the expansion of the NBA.

thank you

[1987_Lakers]

man, i dont care how many teams were in the league. under 500 is under 500 period. and the fact is under 500 teams should not be advancing and beating the so called championship or gretest teams ever.

and YOU NEED TO DO RESEARCH, cuz the fact is that the nba ratings were at its highest in the 90s. which means more people were watching.

Popularity does not equal quality.

And you are acting like a 500 team beat an NBA Championship contender every year. That only happened once in 1981 when the Rockets beat the Lakers in a 3 GAME SERIES and those '81 lakers were no where near as good as they were in 1984-1989.

The fact is there were better players in the 80's and better teams in the 80's.

'83 Sixers
'86 Celtics
'87 Lakers
'89 Pistons

those 4 teams were named on the 10 greatest teams list in NBA History by the NBA.

It's not even close. 80's > 90's

[97 bulls]

Popularity does not equal quality.

And you are acting like a 500 team beat an NBA Championship contender every year. That only happened once in 1981 when the Rockets beat the Lakers in a 3 GAME SERIES and those '81 lakers were no where near as good as they were in 1984-1989.

The fact is there were better players in the 80's and better teams in the 80's.

'83 Sixers
'86 Celtics
'87 Lakers
'89 Pistons

those 4 teams were named on the 10 greatest teams list in NBA History by the NBA.

It's not even close. 80's > 90's

all im sayin is that if these 80s were so great how come so many sub 500 teams made it to the playoffs. every year there were anwhere from 1-4 under 500 teams. i just cant say that this is the measuring stick

[guy]

all im sayin is that if these 80s were so great how come so many sub 500 teams made it to the playoffs. every year there were anwhere from 1-4 under 500 teams. i just cant say that this is the measuring stick

Well naturally with lesser amount of team thats going to happen regardless of the quality of the teams, but I get what you're saying. However, there's no way in today's league that an under .500 team lmake it as far as the NBA Finals like in 81. And I'm not saying the 80s was weak cause it wasn't, I just don't think the 90s or 00s are weaker.

[1987_Lakers]

all im sayin is that if these 80s were so great how come so many sub 500 teams made it to the playoffs. every year there were anwhere from 1-4 under 500 teams. i just cant say that this is the measuring stick

I've already answered that. There were 23 teams in the NBA in the 80's and 16 of them made the playoffs ever year. 2/3 of teams made the playoffs each year so of course there will be teams under .500 making the playoffs.

[1987_Lakers]

Example... If 2/3 of the NBA made the playoffs in 1996 this is how the playoff picture would look like...

1996 NBA Playoff picture

East:
#1 - Chicago Bulls ...72-10
#2 - Orlando Magic ...60-22
#3 - Indiana Pacers ...52-30
#4 - Cleveland Cavaliers ...47-35
#5 - New York Knicks... 47-35
#6 - Atlanta Hawks... 46-36
#7 - Detroit Pistons... 46-36
#8 - Miami Heat ...42-40
#9 - Charlotte Hornets ...41-41
#10 - Washington Bullets ...39-43

West:
#1 - Seattle Supersonics ...64-18
#2 - San Antonio Spurs ...59-23
#3 - Utah Jazz... 55-27
#4 - Los Angeles Lakers ...53-29
#5 - Houston Rockets ...48-34
#6 - Portland Trail Blazers ...44-38
#7 - Phoenix Suns... 41-41
#8 - Sacramento Kings ...39-43
#9 - Golden State Warriors ...36-46
#10 - Denver Nuggets ...35-47

You see? If 2/3 of the NBA made the playoffs in 1996 SIX teams .500 and under would of made the playoffs.

This is why your "if these 80s were so great how come so many sub 500 teams made it to the playoffs" statement is flawed.

[Showtime80']

The whole "well sub-500" teams made the playoffs in the 80's is a silly one simply because 70% of the teams in the NBA made the playoffs from 1984(the year the NBA expanded the number of teams in the playoffs to 16) ti'll 1988 (When the league expanded to 25 teams). That would be like almost 22 teams making the playoffs now, go see if you don't have more than a couple of loosing records in the playoffs(specially in the East).

Number of teams that made the playoffs with loosing records from 1980 to 1983( when it was only 12 teams making the post-season)= 2.

Number of loosing teams that would've made the playoffs from 1984 ti'll 1988 if they had maintained the 12 team format= only 2!!! That's 4 loosing teams in 8 years!!!.

Now let's look at how many loosing teams you had making the playoffs from 91 ti'll 93' (the only period even comparable to the 1980's because the decline definetely started in 1994)

91'=1
92'=3(all from the East)
93'=1

That's 5 teams right there. Calculating how many it would've been had just 66% of the teams(that's 18 teams) made the playoffs during that time the number jumps to 9 teams!!!! That's unbelievable.

So you can't blame an entire decade for David Stern's error in allowing 16 teams to make the playoffs when the league had only 23 teams. It was beneficial from a business stand point because you had more stars and markets in the playoffs but it meant that a lot of loosing teams got in the playoffs.

Plus the 80's had the Lakers-Celtics/Magic vs Bird rivalry that trumped anything that happened in the 90's. You had the 2 greatest Finals in history in 1984 and 1988, tons of transcendant superstars that revitilized decrepit or struggling markets like:

Chicago-Jordan
Portland-Drexler
Houston-Hakeem
Atlanta-Nique
Detroit-Isiah
Utah-Stockton, Malone
Philly-Barkley
New York-King, Ewing
Denver-English
Dallas-Aguirre, Blackman
Milwaukee-Moncrief, Cummings

Most of these guys transformed their franchises through long tenures with those teams and became icons in those cities which is more than you can say for the "Big Money" generation of players that came in the 90's that were never able to fill the shoes of their 80's counterparts.

The 80' will ALWAYS be the Golden Age.

[1987_Lakers]

The whole "well sub-500" teams made the playoffs in the 80's is a silly one simply because 70% of the teams in the NBA made the playoffs from 1984(the year the NBA expanded the number of teams in the playoffs to 16) ti'll 1988 (When the league expanded to 25 teams). That would be like almost 22 teams making the playoffs now, go see if you don't have more than a couple of loosing records in the playoffs(specially in the East).

Number of teams that made the playoffs with loosing records from 1980 to 1983( when it was only 12 teams making the post-season)= 2.

Number of loosing teams that would've made the playoffs from 1984 ti'll 1988 if they had maintained the 12 team format= only 2!!! That's 4 loosing teams in 8 years!!!.

Now let's look at how many loosing teams you had making the playoffs from 91 ti'll 93' (the only period even comparable to the 1980's because the decline definetely started in 1994)

91'=1
92'=3(all from the East)
93'=1

That's 5 teams right there. Calculating how many it would've been had just 66% of the teams(that's 18 teams) made the playoffs during that time the number jumps to 9 teams!!!! That's unbelievable.

So you can't blame an entire decade for David Stern's error in allowing 16 teams to make the playoffs when the league had only 23 teams. It was beneficial from a business stand point because you had more stars and markets in the playoffs but it meant that a lot of loosing teams got in the playoffs.

Plus the 80's had the Lakers-Celtics/Magic vs Bird rivalry that trumped anything that happened in the 90's. You had the 2 greatest Finals in history in 1984 and 1988, tons of transcendant superstars that revitilized decrepit or struggling markets like:

Chicago-Jordan
Portland-Drexler
Houston-Hakeem
Atlanta-Nique
Detroit-Isiah
Utah-Stockton, Malone
Philly-Barkley
New York-King, Ewing
Denver-English
Dallas-Aguirre, Blackman
Milwaukee-Moncrief, Cummings

Most of these guys transformed their franchises through long tenures with those teams and became icons in those cities which is more than you can say for the "Big Money" generation of players that came in the 90's that were never able to fill the shoes of their 80's counterparts.

The 80' will ALWAYS be the Golden Age.

:applause:

[Showtime80']

Guy, a team with only 7 more wins than the 81' Rockets won the title in 95', now that wouldn't have happened in the 1980's! Not to mention the 94' Rockets and 99' Spurs, teams that are generally regarded as some of the worst champions in league history not to mention the last 28 years.

Check out the teams that won in the 80's sometime. All time champions to say the least.

And you really want to talk about the 21st century, with absolutely dreadful teams like the Nets in 02 and 03 and the Cavs in 07 makin the Finals!!! This decade has only had 1 team that you could even put in the same conversation with ANY of the 10 title teams from the 80's and that is the 2001 Lakers, that's it.

[Solid Snake]

I'm trying to sim some games too but every time I click "play game" it just goes to the default error page whether I use IE or Firefox.

[L.Kizzle]

Here's a good way to see which decade was really better between the '80s and the '90s. Instead of comparing players that played big parts in both decade (MJ/Dream/Drexler/Chuck ect) compare players who didn't cross between the two ('80s and '90s) decades.


1980s
Sidney Moncrief
Adrian Dantley
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Julius Erving
George Gervin
Bernard King
Alex English
Dennis Johnson
Bob Lanier
Maurice Cheeks
Ralph Sampson


1990s
David Robinson
Gary Payton
Dikembe Mutombo
Shaquille O'Neal
Jason Kidd
Grant Hill
Alonzo Mourning
Tim Hardaway
Anfernee Hardaway
Shawn Kemp


Then you have the guys who crossed both decades
Magic Johnson
Larry Bird
Isiah Thomas
Dominique Wilkins
Clyde Drexler
Akeem Olajuwon
Michael Jordan
Charles Barkley
John Stockton
Patrick Ewing
Karl Malone
Scottie Pippen
Kevin Johnson

[72-10]

hmm what a game that would be...

admittedly when you are given the entire decade of the 80s compared to the entire decade of the 90s, the 80s should come out on top simply because the 90s had more weak spots, and the weak spots in the 80s were few and far between. However, I would contend that many of the seasons in the 90s match up with seasons in the 80s. Obviously most of these are from the early 90s. I think that the "Golden Era" of basketball could be defined as anywhere from 1983-1993... to 1983-1998.

And the 1993 Finals could be argued as the greatest Finals in history.

[guy]

Guy, a team with only 7 more wins than the 81' Rockets won the title in 95', now that wouldn't have happened in the 1980's! Not to mention the 94' Rockets and 99' Spurs, teams that are generally regarded as some of the worst champions in league history not to mention the last 28 years.

Check out the teams that won in the 80's sometime. All time champions to say the least.

And you really want to talk about the 21st century, with absolutely dreadful teams like the Nets in 02 and 03 and the Cavs in 07 makin the Finals!!! This decade has only had 1 team that you could even put in the same conversation with ANY of the 10 title teams from the 80's and that is the 2001 Lakers, that's it.

I would say the 95 Rockets winning a title in the 80s is more likely then the 81 Rockets making the Finals in the 90s, but both aren't very likely at all. The 95 Rockets had to deal with chemistry issues, including a mid-season trade for Drexler, and some injuries. Hakeem missed 10 games, in which the Rockets went 3-7, they also missed 9 games from the combination of Drexler and Otis Thorpe, who were traded for each other. Its highly doubtful that the Rockets don't win at least 50 games if they don't miss there 1st and 2nd best players for that many games. And I've never heard of people calling the 94 Rockets and 99 Spurs as some of the worse champions of all time.

And yes I'll agree with the last part. The Nets and Cavs teams that made the finals this decade sucked, but thats mostly because of the lopsided conferences. Maybe in the 00s, the 81 Rockets could've made it to the Finals if they were in the East, but they also probably wouldn't be a sub .500 team, so I would still say a sub .500 team would not ever make it to the Finals in this decade.

[Showtime80']

The 1992 and 97 Finals were better than 93' when the Bulls had series' leads of 2-0 and 3-1 at different stages of those Finals. Only 2 games were remotely interesting and the two main guys and teams liked each other too much for the series to ever get to the intense level of those 80's Finals. Magic was elbowing Isiah in the face by the fourth game of 88' for God's sake.

The 1984 Finals were on another stratosphere. Lakers/Celtics, Magic/Bird, unbelievable supporting casts with Kareem, Worthy, McAdoo, Scott, Wilkes against Parish, DJ, McHale, Maxwell, Ainge etc... No other series in history had as many hof'ers and all-stars near or at their peak. The racial aspect of Black versus White. LA flash versus Boston blue collar attitude. The series went down to the last minute of game 7 in the historic Boston Garden and it brought the NBA into the national spotlight. No series before or since had the same impact.

I remember NBC did a poll of the "greatest Finals ever" a few years ago when they still had the games and the 84' Finals were the undesputed king of the hill with the 69' Finals coming in second.

[1987_Lakers]

The 1992 and 97 Finals were better than 93' when the Bulls had series' leads of 2-0 and 3-1 at different stages of those Finals. Only 2 games were remotely interesting and the two main guys and teams liked each other too much for the series to ever get to the intense level of those 80's Finals. Magic was elbowing Isiah in the face by the fourth game of 88' for God's sake.

The 1984 Finals were on another stratosphere. Lakers/Celtics, Magic/Bird, unbelievable supporting casts with Kareem, Worthy, McAdoo, Scott, Wilkes against Parish, DJ, McHale, Maxwell, Ainge etc... No other series in history had as many hof'ers and all-stars near or at their peak. The racial aspect of Black versus White. LA flash versus Boston blue collar attitude. The series went down to the last minute of game 7 in the historic Boston Garden and it brought the NBA into the national spotlight. No series before or since had the same impact.

I remember NBC did a poll of the "greatest Finals ever" a few years ago when they still had the games and the 84' Finals were the undesputed king of the hill with the 69' Finals coming in second.

Agreed. Even though the lakers lost... the 1984 NBA Finals were without a doubt the greatest Finals in NBA History. Not only did the series go to 7 games but there were also 2 games that went to OT.

[DOUBLE DRIBBLE]

How do you compare eras? I mean really?


I lol everytime some d0uchbag tries to bash this era (2000's) The NBA hasn't been as popular than it is now. You have some of the best basketball players ever right now playing in the league.... and people still hate.:(


All of the best international players come to the NBA all of these kids skipping college because they are talented enough to do so..... I think it is all the older people that grew up during other eras that are the haters. Lot of people are jealous of these multi skilled young men that are tearing it up in the League and making all this money...


I'd put this squad up against any other squad from any other era and I think they could hold their own.

PG - Steve Nash
SG - Kobe
SF - Lebron
PF - Duncan
C - KG

[Chicago76]

How do you compare eras? I mean really?

A lot of very reputable Bill James-type statheads who also serve as consultants for NBA franchises have looked into this question and answered it.

Basically, you compare the production of everyone in the league at a certain year and track it for the next year. If you look at everyone who played last year, and track production for next year, the guys playing last year should still get about 98% of total "everything" (pts, reb, ast, etc) the following year if the league level is constant. You will rarely see 100% due to aging of vets.

If it's below 98%, that means the league is getting better, and vets are getting replaced by better talent more quickly. If it's above 98%, that means the vets are able to stick around longer, because the incoming talent isn't good enough to knock them out. If you look at this over 30 years, you can get a good picture of when the league was at its best. The answer is that the league was better in the mid/late 80s than at any time in history. The second best era was the early 60s before all of the expansion. The worst era was the mid 70s before the ABA and NBA merged. The second worst was the early 00s.

The current era is about equal to the early 90s. So sure, the game is more popular now globally, but that doesn't make it any better. McDonalds is more popular than a lot of places, but the food isn't very good. Stars are the same in any era, but the biggest difference between the 1980s, 1990s and today, was the depth of talent in the 80s. I'll take a top 10 list at any position from the 1985 and compare it to any position in 1995. 1985 wins out or is even at every position. A good example of the 1980s vs. today is Mark Price vs. Steve Nash. Nash is marginally better than Price was. The difference is that Price was thought of as a top 5 PG while Nash was always in the MVP conversation.

The talent might catch up to expansion in the next 6 or 7 years to make another greatest era, but that hasn't happened yet.

[guy]

A lot of very reputable Bill James-type statheads who also serve as consultants for NBA franchises have looked into this question and answered it.

Basically, you compare the production of everyone in the league at a certain year and track it for the next year. If you look at everyone who played last year, and track production for next year, the guys playing last year should still get about 98% of total "everything" (pts, reb, ast, etc) the following year if the league level is constant. You will rarely see 100% due to aging of vets.

[B]If it's below 98%, that means the league is getting better, and vets are getting replaced by better talent more quickly. If it's above 98%, that means the vets are able to stick around longer, because the incoming talent isn't good enough to knock them out. If you look at this over 30 years, you can get a good picture of when the league was at its best. The answer is that the league was better in the mid/late 80s than at any time in history. The second best era was the early 60s before all of the expansion. The worst era was the mid 70s before the ABA and NBA merged. The second worst was the early 00s.

The current era is about equal to the early 90s. So sure, the game is more popular now globally, but that doesn't make it any better. McDonalds is more popular than a lot of places, but the food isn't very good. Stars are the same in any era, but the biggest difference between the 1980s, 1990s and today, was the depth of talent in the 80s. I'll take a top 10 list at any position from the 1985 and compare it to any position in 1995. 1985 wins out or is even at every position. A good example of the 1980s vs. today is Mark Price vs. Steve Nash. Nash is marginally better than Price was. The difference is that Price was thought of as a top 5 PG while Nash was always in the MVP conversation.

The talent might catch up to expansion in the next 6 or 7 years to make another greatest era, but that hasn't happened yet.

So basically the rookies have to be responsible for over 2% of the league's production for the league to look like its getting better? Well that would never work cause rookies today aren't expected to do nearly as much as before because of the age they come in. I really don't think you can say the league is getting better or worse by judging what players are doing as rookies. Maybe by doing that for players who have played up to 3-4 years, but not just their first season.

[Silverbullit]

A more accurate comparison between decades would be to compare not only the elite players but the role/bench players too.

Otherwise the thread title should be changed to 80's elite vs 90's elite.

[1987_Lakers]

A more accurate comparison between decades would be to compare not only the elite players but the role/bench players too.

Otherwise the thread title should be changed to 80's elite vs 90's elite.

That would also go to the 80's.

Just look at the roster for the Lakers/Celtics in the 80's and compare it to the roster from the Bulls of the 90's. It's a no brainer. The Lakers/Celtics were deeper than the Bulls. The Lakers and Celtics were deep in every position while the Bulls never had an descent Center. Just compare Luc Longley/ Bill Cartwright to Kareem and Parish. It's no contest. Look at the bench for both teams the Lakers and Celtics had guys like Michael Cooper, Bob McAdoo, Mychal Thompson, Bill Walton, Scott Wedman, Gerald Henderson. While the Bulls had Steve Kerr, Bill Wennington, Toni Kukoc. There is no question the Lakers/Celtics were deeper.

[Chicago76]

So basically the rookies have to be responsible for over 2% of the league's production for the league to look like its getting better? Well that would never work cause rookies today aren't expected to do nearly as much as before because of the age they come in. I really don't think you can say the league is getting better or worse by judging what players are doing as rookies. Maybe by doing that for players who have played up to 3-4 years, but not just their first season.

You can look at it using only 25 year olds to 30 years and comparing their performace the followin year at 26 to 31. Doing this, you can exclude old guys and young players who have yet to hit their stride. The results are still the same. The stongest leagues were still in the mid 1980s and early 1960s. The weakest were still the mid 1970s pre merger and early 00s. The mid 1990 was about avearge.

[guy]

You can look at it using only 25 year olds to 30 years and comparing their performace the followin year at 26 to 31. Doing this, you can exclude old guys and young players who have yet to hit their stride. The results are still the same. The stongest leagues were still in the mid 1980s and early 1960s. The weakest were still the mid 1970s pre merger and early 00s. The mid 1990 was about avearge.

Maybe the leagues had the biggest improvements from the previous year, but I wouldn't say that thats an indicator that the league was strongest. For example, if you look at the early 60s, couldn't that have just been a result of an increase in black players? Wasn't it just before that the teams were purposefully not drafting black players until Red Auerbach changed that? Do you have a link to this?

[Chicago76]

Maybe the leagues had the biggest improvements from the previous year, but I wouldn't say that thats an indicator that the league was strongest. For example, if you look at the early 60s, couldn't that have just been a result of an increase in black players? Wasn't it just before that the teams were purposefully not drafting black players until Red Auerbach changed that? Do you have a link to this?

I dug for the link last night. The work might have been done by Rosenbaum or Dean Oliver--not sure. The jist of it is that you make the same comparison year over year and chain years together. 1960 prime players were compared to their prime + 1 year results in 1961. 1961 prime players were compared to their prime +1 year results in 1962, and so on, until you get to today. You can then standardize the ratios to come up with era comparisons. The jist of it follows:

Mid 1950s: the NBA was still in its infancy, few African Americans or non-east Coast players at this time. Rating of 80 or so.

1960: inclusion of northern African Americans (Chamerblains, Russells, etc)100 or so

1965: inclusion of southern African Americans into the league (Reeds, Fraziers, etc) 115 or so

early to mid 1970s: league expansion and ABA offset further integration. Rating of 95 to 100 or so.

Late 70s: merger of NBA and ABA, and loss of some ABA teams in merger 105 or so

Mid 80s: college game is mature, unusually high crop of young talent. Minimal expansion to offset the growth in talent. 120 or so.

Mid 90s: New expansion era (Toronto, Vancouver, Charlotte, Miami, Orlando, Minnesota) offsets the increase in total player pool. 100 to 105.

Early 2000s: No more dream team era players and their close peers. New guys coming in not able to help as much as they're too young. 95 or so.

Mid 2000s: Young guys are coming around with a little exta time to mature 105 or so.

The game appears to be trending up again. I'm not trying to hate on any group of players. Kareem and Erving played most at most of their peak in a more watered down era, just like Shaq or Duncan. They can't help when they're born, and they would have been among the best in any era. The 80s were just a unique time when you had A) little expansion B) an unusually high talent crop from 1979 or so to 1985 C) a lot of advancements in sports medicine to extend guys' careers and keep them healthy longer and D) not a lot of young players entering the league at 18, with a lot of them breaking down and missing what should be their prime years at 28 or 29.

I'll keep digging.

[lilojmayo]

Sorry, the departure of one player can't bring the level of the play down for the entire league, even if it is Michael Jordan. The fact is, the mid 90s is the greatest era for the center position in NBA history, so I don't understand how it can be classified as weak.

And since when does more teams mean a weaker league? Does that mean that the mid 40s was the strongest era ever because it was the era with the fewest teams in the league?


actually your wrong its it just a coincedence that the year that MJ retired breaking up arguably the greatest moderned day dynasty ever at the end of 98' the nba would be locked out like NHL was last year and only play a 40gm season you think that would have happened if the most powerful man in sports was still playing you think dumbazz i hate when ppl talk and they dont know what the hell they are talking about

[guy]

actually your wrong its it just a coincedence that the year that MJ retired breaking up arguably the greatest moderned day dynasty ever at the end of 98' the nba would be locked out like NHL was last year and only play a 40gm season you think that would have happened if the most powerful man in sports was still playing you think dumbazz i hate when ppl talk and they dont know what the hell they are talking about

Jordan actually partly led the lockout with the players union. He didn't even retire until January 1999. The lockout had nothing to do with the Bulls breaking up and Jordan retiring.

[NoGunzJustSkillz]

i'm watching the celtics/rockets finals and it seems as though the players throw the ball more aggressively than today. just a fyi.

[Sir Charles]

I've been messing around on whatifsports and i made a team from the 80's and 90's.

80's
C - 79-80 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
PF - 86-87 Kevin McHale
SF - 85-86 Larry Bird
SG - 88-89 Michael Jordan
PG - 86-87 Magic Johnson
BENCH
84-85 Isiah Thomas
88-89 Clyde Drexler
80-81 Julius Erving
85-86 Dominique Wilkins
81-82 Moses Malone
88-89 Hakeem Olajuwon
87-88 Charles Barkley

90's
C - 93-94 Hakeem Olajuwon
PF - 90-91 Karl Malone
SF - 93-94 Scottie Pippen
SG - 90-91 Michael Jordan
PG - 90-91 John Stockton
BENCH
98-99 Gary Payton
91-92 Clyde Drexler
92-93 Charles Barkley
93-94 David Robinson
91-92 Reggie Miller
96-97 Grant Hill
93-94 Shaquille O'Neal

So far i've simulated these two teams against each other 4 times. And all 4 times the 80's won.

Who do you guys think would win?

Excuse me dude but no PF was better than Barkley when he was in his PRIME, FIT AND HEALTHY from 1985 to 1995 :no: Not Even Close!

And the 1980s was the Best Time in not only Basketball but Music (popr, rock, aor, prog, metal etc even rap had more class), Movies, Cars, Video Games, Dressing Styles etc everything.

Legends like Jordan, Barkley, Hakeem, Malone, Stockton, Drexler, Pippen, etc of Top 50 Players of All Time could hardly make it to the NBA Finals until the early 90s and in some cases the Late 90s (in the case of Malone and Stockton)

Has anyone also noticed that it wasn`t til 1999 that a team composed mostly of 1990s Drafted Players in General to finally win a title?. I mean 1980s Drafted Players straight away where contending players along the 1970s stars that where left but it took the 1990s Drafted Players way too long to win a title. Thats how ****ing Good and Competitive the 80s were. Man 1980s Nostalgia even en Basketball!

[Loki]

i'm watching the celtics/rockets finals and it seems as though the players throw the ball more aggressively than today. just a fyi.

What do you mean "throw the ball"? Shooting? Passing? Or was it a joke because a player threw the ball at another player in that series? :oldlol:

[97 bulls]

What do you mean "throw the ball"? Shooting? Passing? Or was it a joke because a player threw the ball at another player in that series? :oldlol:

i think that hes sitting in his living room with an mph gun and clocking the passes from one player to another.

[97 bulls]

Excuse me dude but no PF was better than Barkley when he was in his PRIME, FIT AND HEALTHY from 1985 to 1995 :no: Not Even Close!

And the 1980s was the Best Time in not only Basketball but Music (popr, rock, aor, prog, metal etc even rap had more class), Movies, Cars, Video Games, Dressing Styles etc everything.

Legends like Jordan, Barkley, Hakeem, Malone, Stockton, Drexler, Pippen, etc of Top 50 Players of All Time could hardly make it to the NBA Finals until the early 90s and in some cases the Late 90s (in the case of Malone and Stockton)

Has anyone also noticed that it wasn`t til 1999 that a team composed mostly of 1990s Drafted Players in General to finally win a title?. I mean 1980s Drafted Players straight away where contending players along the 1970s stars that where left but it took the 1990s Drafted Players way too long to win a title. Thats how ****ing Good and Competitive the 80s were. Man 1980s Nostalgia even en Basketball!

but its widely regarded that the nba was at a down period in the 70s and alot of those teams that won in the early eighties had dominant 70s players. look at the first five years of the 80s. it all the same. i mean the first few championships in the 80s were still dominated by 70s players. other than magic and bird. and magic joined a good team. so once again, theres really no fifference between the 90s and 80s.

and also as far as comparing the 80s and 90s. 80s proponents biggest argument is the "watered down" theory. this theory is ASSinine. you have no logical basis to support that the league is any less talented now or in the 90s than it was in the 80s. your reasoning that if the league had less teams the talent concentration would be better is a faulty one because drafting players is not an exact science. hundreds of players have ended up being better than the players drafted ahead of them. and obviously, the draft is a gamble. hell, in the early 80s there were FIVE rounds in the draft. as opposed to only TWO in the 90s and present. so really it was easier to get in the nba in the 80s.

the next argument 80s ******gers use is stats. but that has been refuted many times by pace and so forth.

i truly believe 80s people love that decade because of the up and down fast paced style of play. but the fact is that more people watched the nba in the 90s than the 80s and that was mainly bacause of the BULLS. that team was compared to the beatles. with jordan and rodman, and europeans watching toni kukoc who was the best player in europe at the time. a team who is regarded by many as the GREATEST TEAN EVER.

[Da_Realist]

Legends like Jordan, Barkley, Hakeem, Malone, Stockton, Drexler, Pippen, etc of Top 50 Players of All Time could hardly make it to the NBA Finals until the early 90s and in some cases the Late 90s (in the case of Malone and Stockton)

That's not exactly fair. MJ didn't have to face the depth of good teams in the 90's that he would've had to face in the 80's (due to expansion, free agency, etc), but by the same token the 80's didn't have to face the beast that MJ became starting in the early 90's.

By the way, the 80's had more good teams because the talent wasn't as diluted and teams stayed together longer, but the 90's had much better defense. Maybe I should say, defenders were allowed to do much more in the 90's than they were in the 80's. Once the Pistons started winning championships by playing brutally physical defense in the late 80's, it set the tone for the 90's. Less talented teams were not as easy to beat because they were allowed to maul the other team defensively.

For example, the Bucks were a good team in the mid through the late 80's. They were much more talented than, say, the early 90's Knicks. But which team is harder to defeat? I would say the Knicks because they were big strong players that were allowed to play very physical. The Bucks beat you on talent and execution. The Knicks just beat you up.

The Celtics struggled against the Pistons in the late 80's. Larry Bird really struggled against the Pistons, especially in 88. The Pistons are the pre-cursor to the defensive-minded teams of the 90's. It's not too hard to believe that Larry and the Celtics would have struggled against the Pistons-cloned teams of the 90's even though the C's were WAY more talented.

[72-10]

The 80s were actually probably the worst period in music... well the 00s certainly puts up a fight for that dubious distinction with all the shyt out there.

[72-10]

MJ was as much a beast in the late 80s as the early 90s. His team was better in the 90s.

[Loki]

That's not exactly fair. MJ didn't have to face the depth of good teams in the 90's that he would've had to face in the 80's (due to expansion, free agency, etc), but by the same token the 80's didn't have to face the beast that MJ became starting in the early 90's.

By the way, the 80's had more good teams because the talent wasn't as diluted and teams stayed together longer, but the 90's had much better defense. Maybe I should say, defenders were allowed to do much more in the 90's than they were in the 80's. Once the Pistons started winning championships by playing brutally physical defense in the late 80's, it set the tone for the 90's. Less talented teams were not as easy to beat because they were allowed to maul the other team defensively.

For example, the Bucks were a good team in the mid through the late 80's. They were much more talented than, say, the early 90's Knicks. But which team is harder to defeat? I would say the Knicks because they were big strong players that were allowed to play very physical. The Bucks beat you on talent and execution. The Knicks just beat you up.

The Celtics struggled against the Pistons in the late 80's. Larry Bird really struggled against the Pistons, especially in 88. The Pistons are the pre-cursor to the defensive-minded teams of the 90's. It's not too hard to believe that Larry and the Celtics would have struggled against the Pistons-cloned teams of the 90's even though the C's were WAY more talented.

Interesting take.

There's a poster on another board who suggested that one of the main reasons pace was higher back then was because of the concentration of talent -- teams with lots of talent want to run and press their talent advantage early and often, because they have multiple players who can do multiple things with the ball, and all of them can score. Teams that are less talented prefer to slow things down since they need to execute at a much higher level in the halfcourt to get scores, and they also prefer to grind it out/thug it up defensively to neutralize superior talent. At least this is what he says. I think it's an interesting, if not entirely accurate, perspective.

One could look at how Pat Riley coached a team with a ton of offensive talent (the 80's Lakers) versus how he coached teams with far less offensive talent (90's Heat/Knicks) for some evidence of that. Stylistically, it was like night and day. One wonders if philosophical changes in the game re: defense were the only factors driving that change.

[97 bulls]

That's not exactly fair. MJ didn't have to face the depth of good teams in the 90's that he would've had to face in the 80's (due to expansion, free agency, etc), but by the same token the 80's didn't have to face the beast that MJ became starting in the early 90's.

By the way, the 80's had more good teams because the talent wasn't as diluted and teams stayed together longer, but the 90's had much better defense. Maybe I should say, defenders were allowed to do much more in the 90's than they were in the 80's. Once the Pistons started winning championships by playing brutally physical defense in the late 80's, it set the tone for the 90's. Less talented teams were not as easy to beat because they were allowed to maul the other team defensively.

For example, the Bucks were a good team in the mid through the late 80's. They were much more talented than, say, the early 90's Knicks. But which team is harder to defeat? I would say the Knicks because they were big strong players that were allowed to play very physical. The Bucks beat you on talent and execution. The Knicks just beat you up.

The Celtics struggled against the Pistons in the late 80's. Larry Bird really struggled against the Pistons, especially in 88. The Pistons are the pre-cursor to the defensive-minded teams of the 90's. It's not too hard to believe that Larry and the Celtics would have struggled against the Pistons-cloned teams of the 90's even though the C's were WAY more talented.

the league was not "diluted" in the 90s

[1987_Lakers]

but its widely regarded that the nba was at a down period in the 70s and alot of those teams that won in the early eighties had dominant 70s players. look at the first five years of the 80s. it all the same. i mean the first few championships in the 80s were still dominated by 70s players. other than magic and bird. and magic joined a good team. so once again, theres really no fifference between the 90s and 80s.

and also as far as comparing the 80s and 90s. 80s proponents biggest argument is the "watered down" theory. this theory is ASSinine. you have no logical basis to support that the league is any less talented now or in the 90s than it was in the 80s. your reasoning that if the league had less teams the talent concentration would be better is a faulty one because drafting players is not an exact science. hundreds of players have ended up being better than the players drafted ahead of them. and obviously, the draft is a gamble. hell, in the early 80s there were FIVE rounds in the draft. as opposed to only TWO in the 90s and present. so really it was easier to get in the nba in the 80s.

the next argument 80s ******gers use is stats. but that has been refuted many times by pace and so forth.

i truly believe 80s people love that decade because of the up and down fast paced style of play. but the fact is that more people watched the nba in the 90s than the 80s and that was mainly bacause of the BULLS. that team was compared to the beatles. with jordan and rodman, and europeans watching toni kukoc who was the best player in europe at the time. a team who is regarded by many as the GREATEST TEAN EVER.

Like i said before popularity does not equal quality.

The 80's will always be the Glory days of the NBA rather you like it or not. You had more great teams in the 80's much better rivalries in the 80's and better players in the 80's.

Just look at the NBA in the mid-late 80's

Magic Johnson
Larry Bird
Michael Jordan
Charles Barkley
Karl Malone
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Dominique Wilkins
Joe Dumars
Isiah Thomas
Patrick Ewing
Hakeem Olajuwon
John Stockton
Moses Malone
Robert Parish
Julius Erving
Adrian Dantley
Kevin McHale
Clyde Drexler
Alex English
James Worthy

At one point there were 20 HOFers playing in the NBA at the same time with 23 teams in the NBA. Thats an average of nearly 1 HOF player per team. TRULY AMAZING!!!

Not to mention you had 3 of the greatest teams in NBA History playing in this period of time. The '86 Celtics, '87 Lakers, & '89 Pistons.

80's = GOAT:rockon:

[97 bulls]

Interesting take.

There's a poster on another board who suggested that one of the main reasons pace was higher back then was because of the concentration of talent -- teams with lots of talent want to run and press their talent advantage early and often, because they have multiple players who can do multiple things with the ball, and all of them can score. Teams that are less talented prefer to slow things down since they need to execute at a much higher level in the halfcourt to get scores, and they also prefer to grind it out/thug it up defensively to neutralize superior talent. At least this is what he says. I think it's an interesting, if not entirely accurate, perspective.

One could look at how Pat Riley coached a team with a ton of offensive talent (the 80's Lakers) versus how he coached teams with far less offensive talent (90's Heat/Knicks) for some evidence of that. Stylistically, it was like night and day. One wonders if philosophical changes in the game re: defense were the only factors driving that change.

tell your friend that hes an idiot. the knicks were a physical team and the lakers were a finesse team. it has nothing to do with the kincks not being as talented than the lakers beacause they couldnt run, and more to do with a team playing to their strength. the lakers coulnt play a physical style of ball. the only team that could play both styles is the bulls

[97 bulls]

Like i said before popularity does not equal quality.

The 80's will always be the Glory days of the NBA rather you like it or not. You had more great teams in the 80's much better rivalries in the 80's and better players in the 80's.

Just look at the NBA in the mid-late 80's

Magic Johnson
Larry Bird
Michael Jordan
Charles Barkley
Karl Malone
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Dominique Wilkins
Joe Dumars
Isiah Thomas
Patrick Ewing
Hakeem Olajuwon
John Stockton
Moses Malone
Robert Parish
Julius Erving
Adrian Dantley
Kevin McHale
Clyde Drexler
Alex English
James Worthy

At one point there were 20 HOFers playing in the NBA at the same time with 23 teams in the NBA. Thats an average of nearly 1 HOF player per team. TRULY AMAZING!!!

Not to mention you had 3 of the greatest teams in NBA History playing in this period of time. The '86 Celtics, '87 Lakers, & '89 Pistons.

80's = GOAT:rockon:


by you not answering to my rebutal to the watered down theory i assume that you agree. and while i def. feel that the teams and players you named were great the 90s (in particular96-97) bulls were better than all three.

[Sir Charles]

but its widely regarded that the nba was at a down period in the 70s and alot of those teams that won in the early eighties had dominant 70s players. look at the first five years of the 80s. it all the same. i mean the first few championships in the 80s were still dominated by 70s players. other than magic and bird. and magic joined a good team. so once again, theres really no fifference between the 90s and 80s.

That is why I am saying that the 80s draft players or close to the 80s was the most competitive time in the NBA. No era has produced so many Great Stars some which would be in the Top 50-60 Players of All Time and did not make it just do to dumb policies like Dominique Wilkins or Bernard King. Guys like Mark Aguirre, Alex English, Rolando Blackman, Ralph Samson, Chuck Person great players that could not keep themselves as healthy in the 90s but trust me if they did they would have rocked much stronger than most of the 90s Drafted Stars.

It actually took less years for the 80s drafted players to make impacts. Examples are many: Bird, Magic, Worthy, McHale, Isiah, Bernard King, Joe Dumars, Drexler, Dominique Wilkins, Jordan, Barkley, Stockton, Alex English, Rolando Blackman, Ralph Samson, Hakeem, K Malone, Patrick Ewing, Reggie Miller, Tom Chambers, Chris Mullin, Rodman, David Robinson, Kevin Jhonson, Tim Hardaway etc all of these where STAR CALIBER PLAYERS by their 2nd or 3rd season. In some cases by their 1st. Roll Players that were drafted in the 80s were superor to the ones drafted in the 90s too.

What im saying the 80s players made great impacts right away and only few 70s Drafted Stars and Great 70s Drafted Roll Players of that era could sustain themselves with the 80s Drafted Stars but in the 90s pretty much, the 80s Drafted Stars Kept dominating till 1999, when finally the Spurs won with Robinson as their leader and Duncan as an emerging young star.

Compared to the 80s were both 70s and 80s Stars Ruled, very few 1990s Drafted Stars could compete straight up with the 1980s Drafted Stars or Roll Players even if these dudes where way past their phyisical prime (and in 80% of the cases they were inferior). Some examples: Shaq, Alonso Morning, Kemp, Webber, Grant Hill, Jason Kid and thats about it.

Pistons won a Championship with Starting line ups and most players that where all 80s draft players. Pistons: Bill Laimbeer 80-81, Isiah Thomas 81-82, Joe Dumars 85-86, Salley 86-87, Mahorn 80-81, Rodman 86-87, Vinne Johnson 79-80 (very close). Same with the Lakers: Magic 79-80, Worthy 82-83 Bryant 83-84, Green 85-86, Rambis 81-82) and Celtics: Bird is 79-80 pretty much 80s too and McHale 80-81 were the deadly scoring threats, Parish, Maxwell and DJ were late 70s great roll players and semi stars, not early 70s.


and also as far as comparing the 80s and 90s. 80s proponents biggest argument is the "watered down" theory. this theory is ASSinine. you have no logical basis to support that the league is any less talented now or in the 90s than it was in the 80s. your reasoning that if the league had less teams the talent concentration would be better is a faulty one because drafting players is not an exact science. hundreds of players have ended up being better than the players drafted ahead of them. and obviously, the draft is a gamble. hell, in the early 80s there were FIVE rounds in the draft. as opposed to only TWO in the 90s and present. so really it was easier to get in the nba in the 80s.

the next argument 80s ******gers use is stats. but that has been refuted many times by pace and so forth

Then explain to me why is it that the 1980s Drafted Stars and 1980s Drafted Great Roll Players (especially the Stars) kept dominating the 1990s Drafted Stars with ease in most cases?

.

i truly believe 80s people love that decade because of the up and down fast paced style of play. but the fact is that more people watched the nba in the 90s than the 80s and that was mainly bacause of the BULLS. that team was compared to the beatles. with jordan and rodman, and europeans watching toni kukoc who was the best player in europe at the time. a team who is regarded by many as the GREATEST TEAN EVER.

We loved the 80s and early 90s (a continuation of the 80s Stars and Great Roll Players) because it was just a superior era with more talent :rolleyes: not because the fast paced style :confusedshrug:.

And actually in the 1980s, the Lakers was the only team capable of playing that style year after year succesfully for 5 Championships. Portland failed, Jazz failed, Suns failed, Sonics which had both also failed. Rockets finally won when Jordan left to play Baseball.

The truth is that the 1980s and early 1990s was dominated by Slow Paced Eastern Teams like the Sixers: 1 Championship, the Celtics: 3 Championships (could play both but prefered the slow paced), Pistons: 2 Championships and Bulls: 3 Straight Championships.

East: 9 Championships Total (and all were major struggles after winning the Eastern Semifinals etc)
West: 5 Championships Total (just the Lakers, which arrived in perfect condition to the finals year after year because the tough play and competition was in the east!)

Then again go ask DJ, Bird, McHale, Jordan, Barkley, Isiah, Dumars, Laimbeer etc where the real competition was in the East or West? They would say without question the East :hammerhead: . The Lakers had a very easy competition (Rockets and Blazers if that!) compared to these dudes. Even the Bucks, Cavs and Knicks, if they played in the West, would have become a Way Superior Competition in the West for the Lakers in both the late 80s and early 90s.

1980s Stars By far:violin:


The 80s were actually probably the worst period in music... well the 00s certainly puts up a fight for that dubious distinction with all the shyt out there.

Are you insane? Compare Hard Rock, Aor, Metal, Progressive Rock or even Pop Singers, Ballads, Soul of the 80s to the bull**** of the 90s: Grunge,Alternative **** etc :hammerhead:

80s = Goat Time of Basketball and Everything Else!

[Loki]

tell your friend that hes an idiot. the knicks were a physical team and the lakers were a finesse team. it has nothing to do with the kincks not being as talented than the lakers beacause they couldnt run, and more to do with a team playing to their strength. the lakers coulnt play a physical style of ball. the only team that could play both styles is the bulls

Anyone can play a physical style of ball if they buy into it. He's not my "friend," either, just a poster on another board.

[Sir Charles]

Anyone can play a physical style of ball if they buy into it. He's not my "friend," either, just a poster on another board.

Wrong. It depends on the players you have. In the 80s the West used to favor elegant fast paced dribbling passing offensive players for their teams (only the Lakers were succesfull) while the East favored witty agressive defensive minded play ground players that could rebound and post play.

In the 90s both styles minged together so the differences were less

1980s Goat Era of NBA Basketball, Period..

[Sir Charles]

Like i said before popularity does not equal quality.

The 80's will always be the Glory days of the NBA rather you like it or not. You had more great teams in the 80's much better rivalries in the 80's and better players in the 80's.

Just look at the NBA in the mid-late 80's

Magic Johnson
Larry Bird
Michael Jordan
Charles Barkley
Karl Malone
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Dominique Wilkins
Joe Dumars
Isiah Thomas
Patrick Ewing
Hakeem Olajuwon
John Stockton
Moses Malone
Robert Parish
Julius Erving
Adrian Dantley
Kevin McHale
Clyde Drexler
Alex English
James Worthy

At one point there were 20 HOFers playing in the NBA at the same time with 23 teams in the NBA. Thats an average of nearly 1 HOF player per team. TRULY AMAZING!!!

Not to mention you had 3 of the greatest teams in NBA History playing in this period of time. The '86 Celtics, '87 Lakers, & '89 Pistons.

80's = GOAT:rockon:

Forgot David Robinson he was 1989 Draft:), Kevin McHale, Ralph Samson, Dennis Rodman, Chris Mullin, Tom Chambers, Kevin Jhonson, Alex English, Rolando Blackman, Bernard King, Scottie Pippen, Reggie Miller, Fat Lever etc etc..list goes on:applause:

[72-10]

80s
90s

00s
70s


60s

50s


40s

[Sir Charles]

80s
90s

00s
70s


60s

50s


40s

Close but Change it to:

1-Glorious 1980s!

2-Early & Mid 1990s

3-Late 1990s
4-2000s

5-1970s

6-1960s
7-1950s

8-1940s

:)

[97 bulls]

its as simple as the more things change the more they stay the same. the players drafted in the 70s dominated the mid 80s. players drafted in the mid 80s dominated the 90s the players drafted in the 90s are domianating now and players drafted in the 00s are gonna dominate the teens. now as with every rule there is an exception and in this case its guys like magic and bird being drafted right into the 80s and dominating AND THAT DOESNT MEAN THAT THE LEAGUE WAS WEAK BUT BY YOUR LOGIC IT WAS. or jordan dominating all the way up to 98. or guys like wade and lebron coming in and almost instantly making it to the finals or winning it(wade in 95). thats my explanation

[97 bulls]

Forgot David Robinson he was 1989 Draft:), Kevin McHale, Ralph Samson, Dennis Rodman, Chris Mullin, Tom Chambers, Kevin Jhonson, Alex English, Rolando Blackman, Bernard King, Scottie Pippen, Reggie Miller, Fat Lever etc etc..list goes on:applause:


what is the signifacance of this post i could rattle of names of great players drafted in the 90s too. if those are your favorites fine. its saying one era is less talented than others is where i draw the line.

[97 bulls]

Anyone can play a physical style of ball if they buy into it. He's not my "friend," either, just a poster on another board.

dude in order to be play physical you have to be physical.

[1987_Lakers]

its as simple as the more things change the more they stay the same. the players drafted in the 70s dominated the mid 80s. players drafted in the mid 80s dominated the 90s the players drafted in the 90s are domianating now and players drafted in the 00s are gonna dominate the teens. now as with every rule there is an exception and in this case its guys like magic and bird being drafted right into the 80s and dominating AND THAT DOESNT MEAN THAT THE LEAGUE WAS WEAK BUT BY YOUR LOGIC IT WAS. or jordan dominating all the way up to 98. or guys like wade and lebron coming in and almost instantly making it to the finals or winning it(wade in 95). thats my explanation

They also dominated in the 80's. That's what made that era so great.

Guys who dominated the 90's like Charles Barkley, Michael Jordan, Hakeem, Ewing also dominated the 80's.

Barkley had seasons averaging 25-28 PPG while grabbing 12-15 RPG during the 80's. Jordan was MVP and DPOY in '88 also ROY in '85 and was ALL NBA First team 1987-1989. Hakeem reached the NBA Finals in 1986 and ALL NBA First team threw 1987-1989. Patrick Ewing averaged 20 PPG and 9 RPG during the 80's. Karl Malone was a top 3 PF in the NBA during the late 80's.

Now look at players drafted in the mid 90's. Kobe Bryant, Steve Nash, & Kevin Garnett didn't make much noice in the 90's. Rookies in the 90's did not make impact like rookies in the 80's.

[Sir Charles]

They also dominated in the 80's. That's what made that era so great.

Guys who dominated the 90's like Charles Barkley, Michael Jordan, Hakeem, Ewing also dominated the 80's.

Barkley had seasons averaging 25-28 PPG while grabbing 12-15 RPG during the 80's. Jordan was MVP and DPOY in '88 also ROY in '85 and was ALL NBA First team 1987-1989. Hakeem reached the NBA Finals in 1986 and ALL NBA First team threw 1987-1989. Patrick Ewing averaged 20 PPG and 9 RPG during the 80's. Karl Malone was a top 3 PF in the NBA during the late 80's.

Now look at players drafted in the mid 90's. Kobe Bryant, Steve Nash, & Kevin Garnett didn't make much noice in the 90's. Rookies in the 90's did not make impact like rookies in the 80's.

Amen:confusedshrug:

[BrianScalabrine]

The Celtics struggled against the Pistons in the late 80's. Larry Bird really struggled against the Pistons, especially in 88. The Pistons are the pre-cursor to the defensive-minded teams of the 90's. It's not too hard to believe that Larry and the Celtics would have struggled against the Pistons-cloned teams of the 90's even though the C's were WAY more talented.

That's because the big 3 hasn't been healthy since 1987! Injuries also contributed to the Celtics struggle since 1988. Pistons defense was good but tend to be overrated.

[Da_Realist]

That's because the big 3 hasn't been healthy since 1987! Injuries also contributed to the Celtics struggle since 1988. Pistons defense was good but tend to be overrated.

Nah... they weren't injured. I've been watching the 88 series all week. Danny Ainge was injured, but that was it. The Big 3 were not injured. The Pistons were just a better team that year.

[guy]

It actually took less years for the 80s drafted players to make impacts. Examples are many: Bird, Magic, Worthy, McHale, Isiah, Bernard King, Joe Dumars, Drexler, Dominique Wilkins, Jordan, Barkley, Stockton, Alex English, Rolando Blackman, Ralph Samson, Hakeem, K Malone, Patrick Ewing, Reggie Miller, Tom Chambers, Chris Mullin, Rodman, David Robinson, Kevin Jhonson, Tim Hardaway etc all of these where STAR CALIBER PLAYERS by their 2nd or 3rd season. In some cases by their 1st. Roll Players that were drafted in the 80s were superor to the ones drafted in the 90s too.

What im saying the 80s players made great impacts right away and only few 70s Drafted Stars and Great 70s Drafted Roll Players of that era could sustain themselves with the 80s Drafted Stars but in the 90s pretty much, the 80s Drafted Stars Kept dominating till 1999, when finally the Spurs won with Robinson as their leader and Duncan as an emerging young star.

Compared to the 80s were both 70s and 80s Stars Ruled, very few 1990s Drafted Stars could compete straight up with the 1980s Drafted Stars or Roll Players even if these dudes where way past their phyisical prime (and in 80% of the cases they were inferior). Some examples: Shaq, Alonso Morning, Kemp, Webber, Grant Hill, Jason Kid and thats about it.



You say this is because the 80s drafted players had much bigger impacts right away then the 90s drafted players as your evidence that the 90s was weaker. But couldn't the 80's drafted players faster impacts have just occurred cause the 70s drafted players were much weaker? That should be a possibility. Either way, I'll agree with you, that the 80s drafted players are easily the greatest, but I don't see how that makes the 90s weaker, since the majority of those players played in the 90s.

[Da_Realist]

You say this is because the 80s drafted players had much bigger impacts right away then the 90s drafted players as your evidence that the 90s was weaker. But couldn't the 80's drafted players faster impacts have just occurred cause the 70s drafted players were much weaker? That should be a possibility. Either way, I'll agree with you, that the 80s drafted players are easily the greatest, but I don't see how that makes the 90s weaker, since the majority of those players played in the 90s.


And a lot of them were at their absolute best in the 90's. Including Charles Barkley.

[1987_Lakers]

And a lot of them were at their absolute best in the 90's. Including Charles Barkley.

Actually I remember when Charles Barkley said he was a better player on the sixers than he was on the Suns of few years back on the Stephen A. Smith Show.

[Da_Realist]

Actually I remember when Charles Barkley said he was a better player on the sixers than he was on the Suns of few years back on the Stephen A. Smith Show.

Maybe, but he was with the Sixers through 1992. That Sixers team couldn't get over the hump (Celtics then Pistons then Bulls) and were surpassed even by the Knicks so his numbers may not attest to this, but he was a better player in the early 90's than he was in the late 80's. Physically? Maybe not. But overall? It's no question.

It's sort of an exercise in futility, anyway. I think the late 80's were closer in similarity to the early 90's than it was to the early-to-mid 80's thanks to the Detroit Pistons challenging the status quo on how to win championships.

Gone were the free passing offenses with jump shooting forwards and excessive running up and down the court. Detroit changed all that. All of a sudden, sayings like "defense wins championships" and "no layups" came into vogue. Not to say previous champions didn't play defense, but it wasn't the focus like it was with Detroit. That was the only way they could win so they made it their hallmark. Chicago learned from that. Even though they had MJ, Chicago became the best defensive team in the league during their run. Teams realized they didn't need a dynamic 6'9" point guard and a HOF center or a clutch do-everything small forward playing with the best frontcourt in history to win the title. They were a little hard to come by anyway. So they focused on defense.

As much as I hated Detroit growing up, I've come to realize they were trailblazers in a way. They forever changed the way teams thought they could win championships. So I don't think we can accurately divide the two eras at year 1990, but rather at year 1988. 1990 was just like 1989 and 1988 in terms of the style of play, but 1988 was very different than 1987 and before.

[Sir Charles]

Actually I remember when Charles Barkley said he was a better player on the sixers than he was on the Suns of few years back on the Stephen A. Smith Show.

Its true because when you reach your 30s your speed, potence, agility and leaping ability decreases but in the positive edge you are more mature and experienced so you make batter desicions.

A Players Physical Prime: 21-29 yrs of age

A Players Game Prime: 26-32 yrs of age

A Players Last Glimpses: 32-36

A Players Stubborness: 36 beyond

[1987_Lakers]

Maybe, but he was with the Sixers through 1992. That Sixers team couldn't get over the hump (Celtics then Pistons then Bulls) and were surpassed even by the Knicks so his numbers may not attest to this, but he was a better player in the early 90's than he was in the late 80's. Physically? Maybe not. But overall? It's no question.

It's sort of an exercise in futility, anyway. I think the late 80's were closer in similarity to the early 90's than it was to the early-to-mid 80's thanks to the Detroit Pistons challenging the status quo on how to win championships.

Gone were the free passing offenses with jump shooting forwards and excessive running up and down the court. Detroit changed all that. All of a sudden, sayings like "defense wins championships" and "no layups" came into vogue. Not to say previous champions didn't play defense, but it wasn't the focus like it was with Detroit. That was the only way they could win so they made it their hallmark. Chicago learned from that. Even though they had MJ, Chicago became the best defensive team in the league during their run. Teams realized they didn't need a dynamic 6'9" point guard and a HOF center or a clutch do-everything small forward playing with the best frontcourt in history to win the title. They were a little hard to come by anyway. So they focused on defense.

As much as I hated Detroit growing up, I've come to realize they were trailblazers in a way. They forever changed the way teams thought they could win championships. So I don't think we can accurately divide the two eras at year 1990, but rather at year 1988. 1990 was just like 1989 and 1988 in terms of the style of play, but 1988 was very different than 1987 and before.

That is BS. The NBA didn't just change their style of play in 1 year.

1987 League Average: 109.9 PPG...48 FG%
1988 League Average: 108.2 PPG...48 FG%
1989 League Average: 109.2 PPG...47.7 FG%

[97 bulls]

They also dominated in the 80's. That's what made that era so great.

Guys who dominated the 90's like Charles Barkley, Michael Jordan, Hakeem, Ewing also dominated the 80's.

Barkley had seasons averaging 25-28 PPG while grabbing 12-15 RPG during the 80's. Jordan was MVP and DPOY in '88 also ROY in '85 and was ALL NBA First team 1987-1989. Hakeem reached the NBA Finals in 1986 and ALL NBA First team threw 1987-1989. Patrick Ewing averaged 20 PPG and 9 RPG during the 80's. Karl Malone was a top 3 PF in the NBA during the late 80's.

Now look at players drafted in the mid 90's. Kobe Bryant, Steve Nash, & Kevin Garnett didn't make much noice in the 90's. Rookies in the 90's did not make impact like rookies in the 80's.

how about shaq (arguably the best center ever) 2 finals appearances all nba
multiple times in the 90s or mutombo 2 time dpoy in the 90s penny hardaway 2 finals appearances chris webber alonzo mourning grant hill iverson
like i said in a previous post there are exceptions to every rule but there are some 90s drafted players that dominated that era

[97 bulls]

That is BS. The NBA didn't just change their style of play in 1 year.

1987 League Average: 109.9 PPG...48 FG%
1988 League Average: 108.2 PPG...48 FG%
1989 League Average: 109.2 PPG...47.7 FG%

its funny how you read what you want to read. i believe he was more or less saying that the pistons played a style of ball that was played in the 90s and were very sucessfull against the lakers and celtics thus starting a trend. i firmly believe that the pistons were BETTER than the lakers in 88 and would have won had it not been for thomas ankle.

[97 bulls]

You say this is because the 80s drafted players had much bigger impacts right away then the 90s drafted players as your evidence that the 90s was weaker. But couldn't the 80's drafted players faster impacts have just occurred cause the 70s drafted players were much weaker? That should be a possibility. Either way, I'll agree with you, that the 80s drafted players are easily the greatest, but I don't see how that makes the 90s weaker, since the majority of those players played in the 90s.

exactly

[Sir Charles]

how about shaq (arguably the best center ever) 2 finals appearances all nba
multiple times in the 90s or mutombo 2 time dpoy in the 90s penny hardaway 2 finals appearances chris webber alonzo mourning grant hill iverson
like i said in a previous post there are exceptions to every rule but there are some 90s drafted players that dominated that era

Only Shaq made a strong impact compared to the others maybe Iverson and Hill (although this guy lasted only about 6 seasons, he would have been the new Pippen). The rest of the players including Webber, Kidd, Garnett, Duncan etc could only dream of reaching the level Jordan, Barkley, Hakeem, Malone, Stockton and others had in the late 80s and early 90s. Its a fact that the 80s was the era where Most Talent was Drafted and you can even include Magic and Bird since they are 1979-80 right in there

[1987_Lakers]

how about shaq (arguably the best center ever) 2 finals appearances all nba
multiple times in the 90s or mutombo 2 time dpoy in the 90s penny hardaway 2 finals appearances chris webber alonzo mourning grant hill iverson
like i said in a previous post there are exceptions to every rule but there are some 90s drafted players that dominated that era

80's Hakeem, MJ, and Barkley, K. Malone > 90's Shaq, Iverson, Hardaway, Hill

And most of the players you mention were in their prime in the 90's. The Only players you mentioned that were great in the 90's and 00's were Iverson and Shaq.

[nycelt84]

how about shaq (arguably the best center ever) 2 finals appearances all nba
multiple times in the 90s or mutombo 2 time dpoy in the 90s penny hardaway 2 finals appearances chris webber alonzo mourning grant hill iverson
like i said in a previous post there are exceptions to every rule but there are some 90s drafted players that dominated that era

Shaq didn't have 2 finals appearances in the 90's nor did Penny Hardaway. Chris Webber didn't have a breakout season until '99, and Alonzo Mourning's first great season was also '99 and that Iverson's first great season also.

[BrianScalabrine]

Nah... they weren't injured. I've been watching the 88 series all week. Danny Ainge was injured, but that was it. The Big 3 were not injured. The Pistons were just a better team that year.

Yes they were, they just sucked it up and played, so it's not clearly observeable. I mean players back in the day are tougher than the players these days, who, you know, eat bad hamburger and get sick.

[97 bulls]

Shaq didn't have 2 finals appearances in the 90's nor did Penny Hardaway. Chris Webber didn't have a breakout season until '99, and Alonzo Mourning's first great season was also '99 and that Iverson's first great season also.

i stand corrected on the finals appearances, however, i was replying to the assumption that players drafted in the 90s didnt have an immediate impact on the league similar to the players in the 80s. webber was widely regarded as one if the top pf in the league from from his rookie season. and he put up stats similar to barkleys if you account for pace. hardaway was one regarded as the next magic johnson and would have put up similar stats if he played in the faster tempo 80s. iverson never had a bad season from his rookie until now. and the fact is none of the 80s players won just like none of the 90s players, some were close, just like some were close in the 80s. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE.

[97 bulls]

Yes they were, they just sucked it up and played, so it's not clearly observeable. I mean players back in the day are tougher than the players these days, who, you know, eat bad hamburger and get sick.

they may have had nagging injuries but all players are hurt in some way shape or form.

[Da_Realist]

Yes they were, they just sucked it up and played, so it's not clearly observeable. I mean players back in the day are tougher than the players these days, who, you know, eat bad hamburger and get sick.

That's just an excuse. Nobody, except Ainge, was hurt until DJ hurt his back late in Game 5 and Robert Parish hurt his knee in Game 6. The Pistons were already way on their way by then. And Kevin Mchale actually had a pretty good series. The Celtics weren't hurt, they just got beat.

[1987_Lakers]

That's just an excuse. Nobody, except Ainge, was hurt until DJ hurt his back late in Game 5 and Robert Parish hurt his knee in Game 6. The Pistons were already way on their way by then. And Kevin Mchale actually had a pretty good series. The Celtics weren't hurt, they just got beat.

I agree '88 Pistons > '88 Celtics

But the Celtics were past their prime by '88. They relied to much on their starting 5 in the late 80's. They had no bench what so ever. That's one of the reasons they lost the '87 Finals because their lack of bench.

[Sir Charles]

i stand corrected on the finals appearances, however, i was replying to the assumption that players drafted in the 90s didnt have an immediate impact on the league similar to the players in the 80s. webber was widely regarded as one if the top pf in the league from from his rookie season. and he put up stats similar to barkleys if you account for pace. hardaway was one regarded as the next magic johnson and would have put up similar stats if he played in the faster tempo 80s. iverson never had a bad season from his rookie until now. and the fact is none of the 80s players won just like none of the 90s players, some were close, just like some were close in the 80s. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE.

To Compare Webber to Barkley is a disrespect to to Basketball. Thats like comparing Bryant to Jordan. This is what Barkley did to Webber:rolleyes:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=cAdMW4Hi8yI


And this is Charles in his 30s, he was no longer in his Physical Prime:)

[97 bulls]

I agree '88 Pistons > '88 Celtics

But the Celtics were past their prime by '88. They relied to much on their starting 5 in the late 80's. They had no bench what so ever. That's one of the reasons they lost the '87 Finals because their lack of bench.

im just curious, who on the 88 version of the celtics were past their prime?

[1987_Lakers]

i stand corrected on the finals appearances, however, i was replying to the assumption that players drafted in the 90s didnt have an immediate impact on the league similar to the players in the 80s. webber was widely regarded as one if the top pf in the league from from his rookie season. and he put up stats similar to barkleys if you account for pace. hardaway was one regarded as the next magic johnson and would have put up similar stats if he played in the faster tempo 80s. iverson never had a bad season from his rookie until now. and the fact is none of the 80s players won just like none of the 90s players, some were close, just like some were close in the 80s. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE.

You can chat all you want about how Webber and Hardaway having immediate impact impact on the NBA in the 90's but the truth is none of these players even come close to what Barkley, MJ, Hakeem did in the 80's.

Truth is Webber wasn't even an NBA All Star until his 4th season in the NBA. MJ, Hakeem, and Barkley were All NBA First team players by their 4th seasons.

[1987_Lakers]

im just curious, who on the 88 version of the celtics were past their prime?

The Celtics as a TEAM were past their prime. They had no bench. Parish was getting old (34 yrs old in '88) as well as DJ (33 yrs old in '88).

[Sir Charles]

You can chat all you want about how Webber and Hardaway having immediate impact impact on the NBA in the 90's but the truth is none of these players even come close to what Barkley, MJ, Hakeem did in the 80's.

Truth is Webber wasn't even an NBA All Star until his 4th season in the NBA. MJ, Hakeem, and Barkley were All NBA First team players by their 4th seasons.

A Prime MJ, Charles, Hakeem in their 20s and early 30s today would be schooling the whole league in Scoring, Rebounding, Steals, Assists, Blocking Shots, with PERs and FG% that would be flying out of this forum:rolleyes:

[97 bulls]

A Prime MJ, Charles, Hakeem in their 20s and early 30s today would be schooling the whole league in Scoring, Rebounding, Steals, Assists, Blocking Shots, with PERs and FG% that would be flying out of this forum:rolleyes:

truthfully you guys are making my point for me especially 87 lakers about the dominance of . truth is jordan and company were dominating the 80s but could never win because they never had a team around them

[1987_Lakers]

truthfully you guys are making my point for me especially 87 lakers about the dominance of . truth is jordan and company were dominating the 80s but could never win because they never had a team around them

Jordan got to the ECF in '89
Hakeem reahced the NBA Finals in '86

They could never win because they went up against the greatest teams in NBA History. '86 Celtics for Hakeem and '89 Pistons for MJ.

[97 bulls]

Jordan got to the ECF in '89
Hakeem reahced the NBA Finals in '86

They could never win because they went up against the greatest teams in NBA History. '86 Celtics for Hakeem and '89 Pistons for MJ.

like i said, if they had the team, it would be different

[97 bulls]

Jordan got to the ECF in '89
Hakeem reahced the NBA Finals in '86

They could never win because they went up against the greatest teams in NBA History. '86 Celtics for Hakeem and '89 Pistons for MJ.

and jordan and olajuwan drug those teams to the finals and championships

[1987_Lakers]

and jordan and olajuwan drug those teams to the finals and championships

Actually no. Go look at that '86 Rockets roster 1 more time please. You had Ralph Sampson who averaged 19 PPG and 11 RPG and also hit the game winning shot in Game 5 of the WCF. Lewis Lloyd was a player who averaged 17 PPG and shot 53% FG. Their Point Guard John Lucas avergaed 15.5 PPG and nearly 9 APG. After 1986 people predicted this team to be the best team in the West for years to come and they would have if it wasn't for all the drug problems that team faced.

And for the '89 Bulls you had solid young players Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant.

And it's funny how you said...."truth is jordan and company were dominating the 80s but could never win because they never had a team around them". And once I pointed out Hakeem was in the Finals in '86 and Jordan was in the ECF in '89 you changed to..."like i said, if they had the team, it would be different."

Please stop talking out of your *** and think.

[Da_Realist]

I agree '88 Pistons > '88 Celtics

But the Celtics were past their prime by '88. They relied to much on their starting 5 in the late 80's. They had no bench what so ever. That's one of the reasons they lost the '87 Finals because their lack of bench.

True, very true. But that's life. Just like the Pistons were past their prime in 91. That's how the torch gets passed. Well, that's how it used to get passed. :)

[Sir Charles]

I wouldn't put McHale over Charles Barkley/MosesMalone for the 80s. IMO, Hakeem could have played PF too. He was versatile enough to defend both PFs and Cs in his prime. I personally think McHale was slightly overrated on both ends of the court. :confusedshrug:

For the 90's, you can also do Shaq for C and Hakeem for PF instead of Karl Malone. Malone was a beast but I think a Shaq/Hakeem duo would be basically unstoppable front-court for the 90s.


Barkley was the Greatest Powerforward Ever when he was in his Prime and Healthy Free from Back and Knee Injuries.That was from 1985 to 1995. No Powerforward was better than him those years. Anyone who disagrees should shoot themselves :banghead:

McHale was not underrated he was the Greatest Post Up Powerforward Ever and could score 18-19 ppg in 31-32 minutes of play with over 60% FG. Barkley called him the toughest PF to Guard in the Post. Malone was a Great Hard Worker, he could Run alot for a big Man and lived of the Beutifull Pick and Rolls that master organizer Stockton designed for him in that fast paced Sloan System.

McHale: 1980-81 to 1985-86 (Second Barkley, Third Malone)
Barkley: 1986-87 to 1995-96 (Second Malone, Third McHale, Fourth Webber)
Malone: 1996-87 to 1998-99 (Second Barkley, Third Webber)
Duncan: 1999-2000 to 2004-2005 (Malone Second, Third Garnett)
Garnett: 2005-2006 to 2007-2008 (Second Duncan)

Something like that:)

[nycelt84]

i stand corrected on the finals appearances, however, i was replying to the assumption that players drafted in the 90s didnt have an immediate impact on the league similar to the players in the 80s. webber was widely regarded as one if the top pf in the league from from his rookie season. and he put up stats similar to barkleys if you account for pace. hardaway was one regarded as the next magic johnson and would have put up similar stats if he played in the faster tempo 80s. iverson never had a bad season from his rookie until now. and the fact is none of the 80s players won just like none of the 90s players, some were close, just like some were close in the 80s. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE.

Chris Webber wasn't considered a top PF until he came to the Kings in '99, at the time he was traded there were people saying the Kings made a bad move trading Mitch Richmond for him. Iverson never had a bad season but his 1st 2 years were not great years, '99 was his first great season.

[1987_Lakers]

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/27/93628583_d301537c0f.jpg

[Koop1]

lol larry bird
I've always felt that he was utter garbage

[Sir Charles]

lol larry bird
I've always felt that he was utter garbage

How old are you? :rolleyes:

Larry Bird was and is the Greatest Smallforward of All Time:hammerhead: . Don`t be fooled by his unathletic looks. Ask Doctor J about his "Hick From French Lick" appearance which would disguise a cold bastard that could kill you by shooting, scoring, passing, rebounding and stealing the ball in the clutchest of situations

[willds09]

80s is good, with magic, bird, isiah, nique, dr j, and even mj as a youngster, but tha 90s put tha nba on another level in endorsements with food, sneakers, tv commercials, nba jerseys started selling like krazy, and even tha movie space jam, but tha game itself had mj's 6 rings, tha beginning of iverson, hakeem, barkley bustin ass, magic all star game in florida, knicks went to finals twice, I couldn't stand him but reggie made a name for himself, shaq, nba on nbc, do u want me to explain more??????

[1987_Lakers]

80s is good, with magic, bird, isiah, nique, dr j, and even mj as a youngster, but tha 90s put tha nba on another level in endorsements with food, sneakers, tv commercials, nba jerseys started selling like krazy, and even tha movie space jam, but tha game itself had mj's 6 rings, tha beginning of iverson, hakeem, barkley bustin ass, magic all star game in florida, knicks went to finals twice, I couldn't stand him but reggie made a name for himself, shaq, nba on nbc, do u want me to explain more??????


GREAT ARGUMENT!!!!!:roll:

[23jordan23]

I coulda swore when you said 90's ..I thought you more meant like

David Robinson
Shaq
Penny
Grant Hill
Iverson
Kobe
Kemp
Glenn Robinson
Larry Johnson
Mutombo
Mourning
Tim Hardaway
Kevin Johnson
etc..

Vs 80's (who were Jordan,Magic,Bird,Malone and Barkley etc..)Jordan dominated the 90's, but was from the 80's era.. same with some of the players I listed like Barkley..

Obviously the 80's would eat the 90's..hands down.

[Sir Charles]

I coulda swore when you said 90's ..I thought you more meant like

David Robinson
Shaq
Penny
Grant Hill
Iverson
Kobe
Kemp
Glenn Robinson
Larry Johnson
Mutombo
Mourning
Tim Hardaway
Kevin Johnson
etc..

Vs 80's (who were Jordan,Magic,Bird,Malone and Barkley etc..)Jordan dominated the 90's, but was from the 80's era.. same with some of the players I listed like Barkley..

Obviously the 80's would eat the 90's..hands down.

Amen, but don`t say Jordan Dominanted. Say the JORDAN-PIPPEN DUO DOMINATED and With A Great All Around Team :rolleyes:

Then Again in 1996 The Bulls Won Again With An 80s Based Drafted Team!

Jordan: 1984 SUPERSTAR
Pippen: 1988 SUPERSTAR
Harper: 1986 (All Star Caliber for 5-6 over 20 ppg and A Top Defensive SG)
Rodman: 1986 All-Star. Defensive Player of The Year and Top Rebounder of the 90s


Sorry...but...

Kevin Jhonson is an 80s Player. Drafted in 1987 :)
Tim Hardaway is an 80s Player. Drafted in 1989 (at age 23, could have been drafter earlier maybe) :)

And Yes, David Robinson was drafted in 1989. He is 80s not 90s :no: and could have probaly entered the NBA even earlier in 1986 at age 21 but he decided to finish his Marine etc:)


On the other Hand. Yes 90s Was An Era of Marketing but 80s was More Passionete and Fan-Like by Far. Fans in the 80s Where Also More Blind and Rivalries Were Way Superior to the 90s :)

1980s Rocks:pimp:

[willds09]

Amen, but don`t say Jordan Dominanted. Say the JORDAN-PIPPEN DUO DOMINATED and With A Great All Around Team :rolleyes:

Then Again in 1996 The Bulls Won Again With An 80s Based Drafted Team!

Jordan: 1984 SUPERSTAR
Pippen: 1988 SUPERSTAR
Harper: 1986 (All Star Caliber for 5-6 over 20 ppg and A Top Defensive SG)
Rodman: 1986 All-Star. Defensive Player of The Year and Top Rebounder of the 90s


Sorry...but...

Kevin Jhonson is an 80s Player. Drafted in 1987 :)
Tim Hardaway is an 80s Player. Drafted in 1989 (at age 23, could have been drafter earlier maybe) :)

And Yes, David Robinson was drafted in 1989. He is 80s not 90s :no: and could have probaly entered the NBA even earlier in 1986 at age 21 but he decided to finish his Marine etc:)


On the other Hand. Yes 90s Was An Era of Marketing but 80s was More Passionete and Fan-Like by Far. Fans in the 80s Where Also More Blind and Rivalries Were Way Superior to the 90s :)

1980s Rocks:pimp:
you most be crazy talking about it was fan-like by far in tha 80's, tha fans payed more attention to basketball in the 90's, mainly cuz of michael jordan, not to mention tha 80's had only a couple of basketballl video games, nba took ova in tha 90s, and u naming all tha greats who was drafted, DRAFTED, in the 80's, but they excel at their best in tha 90s! there's nothing u can say about that...:rockon:

[Sir Charles]

you most be crazy talking about it was fan-like by far in tha 80's, tha fans payed more attention to basketball in the 90's, mainly cuz of michael jordan, not to mention tha 80's had only a couple of basketballl video games, nba took ova in tha 90s, and u naming all tha greats who was drafted, DRAFTED, in the 80's, but they excel at their best in tha 90s! there's nothing u can say about that...:rockon:

NBA became more of an international thing in the 90s Il give you that true! That was do to the Puppet Jordan but in the 80s Rivalries where superior. You had the Lakers vs Celtics. Celtics vs Pistons. Celtics vs Sixers. Bulls vs Pistons. Sixers vs Pistons. In the West Blazers vs Lakers. Rockets vs Lakers. Suns vs them too.

The Bucks, Cavs and Knicks in the late 80s where competitive too.

Play-Offs where more agressive and expectations where more. After the Celtic and Lakers Legacy Passed and then the Pistons got old, the Bulls where the only real contender for a Champioship.

In the case of Jordan and Barkley their Excelling years where 1986 to 1993. 1 more year in the 80s:). Jordan and Barkley by 1993 where 30 yeards old. Theire Physical Excell and Potence was definetly in the 80s but in the early 90s they had a more of a solid game

Yet, you can`t tell me Im wrong when i say that in terms of Finess and Athleticism "They were Better in the 1980s". That Era Set The Tone for the 90s Marketing! :rockon:

Maybe you just like the 90s better because you are a Jordan and Bulls fan and Jordan was not a Champ in the 80s when the Celtics-Lakers and Pistons ruled and kicked their asses daily :confusedshrug:

[97 bulls]

To Compare Webber to Barkley is a disrespect to to Basketball. Thats like comparing Bryant to Jordan. This is what Barkley did to Webber:rolleyes:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=cAdMW4Hi8yI


And this is Charles in his 30s, he was no longer in his Physical Prime:)

while i agree that barkley was better than webber, webber wasnt a scrub. and brkley was the mvp and webber held as a rookie held his own.

[97 bulls]

You can chat all you want about how Webber and Hardaway having immediate impact impact on the NBA in the 90's but the truth is none of these players even come close to what Barkley, MJ, Hakeem did in the 80's.

Truth is Webber wasn't even an NBA All Star until his 4th season in the NBA. MJ, Hakeem, and Barkley were All NBA First team players by their 4th seasons.

let get this clear. im not sayn that hardaway webber and co are comparable to jordan and co. but those player were def not scrubs as you guys basically saying. in my opinion jordan is the greatest ever. and barkley and hakeem are in the top 5 in their respective positions. but the fact is the 80s drafted players were already established in the 90s and it really not fair to compare them to 1st and 2nd year players tryn to make a name for themselves.

[97 bulls]

Actually no. Go look at that '86 Rockets roster 1 more time please. You had Ralph Sampson who averaged 19 PPG and 11 RPG and also hit the game winning shot in Game 5 of the WCF. Lewis Lloyd was a player who averaged 17 PPG and shot 53% FG. Their Point Guard John Lucas avergaed 15.5 PPG and nearly 9 APG. After 1986 people predicted this team to be the best team in the West for years to come and they would have if it wasn't for all the drug problems that team faced.

And for the '89 Bulls you had solid young players Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant.

And it's funny how you said...."truth is jordan and company were dominating the 80s but could never win because they never had a team around them". And once I pointed out Hakeem was in the Finals in '86 and Jordan was in the ECF in '89 you changed to..."like i said, if they had the team, it would be different."

Please stop talking out of your *** and think.

i didnt contradict myself. i said they were dominating the 80s statisticly but never could win a championship. you picked out two seasons 86 for the rockets and 89 for the bulls as if those were the only two seasons in the 80s :rolleyes: and used those to support your argument. i responded by saying that they drug those teams to those two achievements. THEY GOT THERE IN SPITE OF THE TEAMS THEY WERE ON PERIOD. nad as far as the bulls 89 version scottie and horace were not the players they were in 91. they were IN THE LEAGUE TWO YEARS. how many players playin big roles win in their first 2 years. magic did but he was on a great team and bird did but thats not sn indictment on the rest of the league. not to mention magic and bird were coming into a weak league.

[97 bulls]

Amen, but don`t say Jordan Dominanted. Say the JORDAN-PIPPEN DUO DOMINATED and With A Great All Around Team :rolleyes:

Then Again in 1996 The Bulls Won Again With An 80s Based Drafted Team!

Jordan: 1984 SUPERSTAR
Pippen: 1988 SUPERSTAR
Harper: 1986 (All Star Caliber for 5-6 over 20 ppg and A Top Defensive SG)
Rodman: 1986 All-Star. Defensive Player of The Year and Top Rebounder of the 90s


Sorry...but...

Kevin Jhonson is an 80s Player. Drafted in 1987 :)
Tim Hardaway is an 80s Player. Drafted in 1989 (at age 23, could have been drafter earlier maybe) :)

And Yes, David Robinson was drafted in 1989. He is 80s not 90s :no: and could have probaly entered the NBA even earlier in 1986 at age 21 but he decided to finish his Marine etc:)


On the other Hand. Yes 90s Was An Era of Marketing but 80s was More Passionete and Fan-Like by Far. Fans in the 80s Where Also More Blind and Rivalries Were Way Superior to the 90s :)

1980s Rocks:pimp:

what you typed is no different from ant other decade. look at now, this decade is dominated by players drafted in the 90s. shaq, duncan, bryant, the whole pistons team, garnett, pierce,allen, nash, iverson all are dominating the league now and thats not a knock on players like chris paul, james, wade and player drafted in the 00s.

[Da_Realist]

Amen, but don`t say Jordan Dominanted. Say the JORDAN-PIPPEN DUO DOMINATED and With A Great All Around Team :rolleyes:

Then Again in 1996 The Bulls Won Again With An 80s Based Drafted Team!

Jordan: 1984 SUPERSTAR
Pippen: 1988 SUPERSTAR
Harper: 1986 (All Star Caliber for 5-6 over 20 ppg and A Top Defensive SG)
Rodman: 1986 All-Star. Defensive Player of The Year and Top Rebounder of the 90s


Sorry...but...

Kevin Jhonson is an 80s Player. Drafted in 1987 :)
Tim Hardaway is an 80s Player. Drafted in 1989 (at age 23, could have been drafter earlier maybe) :)

And Yes, David Robinson was drafted in 1989. He is 80s not 90s :no: and could have probaly entered the NBA even earlier in 1986 at age 21 but he decided to finish his Marine etc:)


On the other Hand. Yes 90s Was An Era of Marketing but 80s was More Passionete and Fan-Like by Far. Fans in the 80s Where Also More Blind and Rivalries Were Way Superior to the 90s :)

1980s Rocks:pimp:

So you're argument is for the 80's because the players that dominated the 90's were drafted in the 80's? That doesn't make sense. So stars like Magic, Bird, Dr J, Moses Malone, etc don't count for the 80's because they were drafted in the 70's?

And also...


Amen, but don`t say Jordan Dominanted. Say the JORDAN-PIPPEN DUO DOMINATED and With A Great All Around Team

Are you crazy?

[97 bulls]

Amen, but don`t say Jordan Dominanted. Say the JORDAN-PIPPEN DUO DOMINATED and With A Great All Around Team :rolleyes:

Then Again in 1996 The Bulls Won Again With An 80s Based Drafted Team!

Jordan: 1984 SUPERSTAR
Pippen: 1988 SUPERSTAR
Harper: 1986 (All Star Caliber for 5-6 over 20 ppg and A Top Defensive SG)
Rodman: 1986 All-Star. Defensive Player of The Year and Top Rebounder of the 90s


Sorry...but...

Kevin Jhonson is an 80s Player. Drafted in 1987 :)
Tim Hardaway is an 80s Player. Drafted in 1989 (at age 23, could have been drafter earlier maybe) :)

And Yes, David Robinson was drafted in 1989. He is 80s not 90s :no: and could have probaly entered the NBA even earlier in 1986 at age 21 but he decided to finish his Marine etc:)


On the other Hand. Yes 90s Was An Era of Marketing but 80s was More Passionete and Fan-Like by Far. Fans in the 80s Where Also More Blind and Rivalries Were Way Superior to the 90s :)

1980s Rocks:pimp:

and i have a question for you were do you put players like magic, bird, jabaar, malone, dr. j, and parrish as far as decade? because they were all drafted in the 70s

[1987_Lakers]

No matter how much you argue 97 Bulls... the 80's is superior to the 90's. Lets compare how many HOF players were in the NBA in the mid 80's to how many HOF players were in the NBA in the mid 90's.

80's
Magic Johnson
Larry Bird
Michael Jordan
Charles Barkley
Karl Malone
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Dominique Wilkins
Joe Dumars
Isiah Thomas
Patrick Ewing
Hakeem Olajuwon
John Stockton
Moses Malone
Robert Parish
Julius Erving
Adrian Dantley
Kevin McHale
Clyde Drexler
Alex English
James Worthy

90's
Michael Jordan
Scottie Pippen
Patrick Ewing
Reggie Miller
Charles Barkley
Clyde Drexler
Shaquille O'neal
David Robinson
Hakeem Olajuwon
Karl Malone
John Stockton
Joe Dumars
Jason Kidd (Future HOF)
Gary Payton (Future HOF)

Thats 20 HOF players for the 80's and only 14 for the 90's. Much more HOF players in the Mid 80's. AMAZING! No matter what you say the 80's will always be #1. Not only did they have better players but they also had better teams as well.

:bowdown: 80's:bowdown:

[nycelt84]

what you typed is no different from ant other decade. look at now, this decade is dominated by players drafted in the 90s. shaq, duncan, bryant, the whole pistons team, garnett, pierce,allen, nash, iverson all are dominating the league now and thats not a knock on players like chris paul, james, wade and player drafted in the 00s.

Dwayne Wade has already won a championship and was a Finals MVP and Lebron took his team to a championship in '07. Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili were drafted this decade and a huge part of 3 championship teams.

[97 bulls]

No matter how much you argue 97 Bulls... the 80's is superior to the 90's. Lets compare how many HOF players were in the NBA in the mid 80's to how many HOF players were in the NBA in the mid 90's.

80's
Magic Johnson
Larry Bird
Michael Jordan
Charles Barkley
Karl Malone
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Dominique Wilkins
Joe Dumars
Isiah Thomas
Patrick Ewing
Hakeem Olajuwon
John Stockton
Moses Malone
Robert Parish
Julius Erving
Adrian Dantley
Kevin McHale
Clyde Drexler
Alex English
James Worthy

90's
Michael Jordan
Scottie Pippen
Patrick Ewing
Charles Barkley
Clyde Drexler
Shaquille O'neal
David Robinson
Hakeem Olajuwon
Karl Malone
John Stockton
Joe Dumars
Jason Kidd (Future HOF)
Gary Payton (Future HOF)

Thats 20 HOF players for the 80's and only 13 for the 90's. Much more HOF players in the Mid 80's. AMAZING! No matter what you say the 80's will always be #1. Not only did they have better players but they also had better teams as well.

:bowdown: 80's:bowdown:
that may be so but alot of players playing at a hof level were injured by the 2000 decade hardaway, and hill to name a few. then you did not mention iverson, mourning, mutombo, rodman, garnett, richmond, miller, and webber. then, some of the guys you mentioned in the 80s list made it more for their contributions in the 70s jabaar, erving, and malone. kareem was a good center in the 80-85 years and a decent center in the later 80s.

so from that view the 90s had more hofs than the 80s.

[1987_Lakers]

that may be so but alot of players playing at a hof level were injured by the 2000 decade hardaway, and hill to name a few. then you did not mention iverson, mourning, mutombo, rodman, garnett, richmond, miller, and webber. then, some of the guys you mentioned in the 80s list made it more for their contributions in the 70s jabaar, erving, and malone. kareem was a good center in the 80-85 years and a decent center in the later 80s.

so from that view the 90s had more hofs than the 80s.

Richmond, Webber and Rodman are not HOFers. If they are HOFers then you have to put guys like Dennis Johnson and Sidney Moncrief in the HOF first.

And even if u add Miller, Mourning, Mutumbo, Iverson, & Garnett to the list there were still more HOFers in the 80's.

Edit: If Rodman is chosen to the HOF then he would have to be listed on the 80's list as well because he enterd the NBA in 1986. And I also forgot to Mention George Gervin for the 80's.

[1987_Lakers]

that may be so but alot of players playing at a hof level were injured by the 2000 decade hardaway, and hill to name a few. then you did not mention iverson, mourning, mutombo, rodman, garnett, richmond, miller, and webber. then, some of the guys you mentioned in the 80s list made it more for their contributions in the 70s jabaar, erving, and malone. kareem was a good center in the 80-85 years and a decent center in the later 80s.

so from that view the 90s had more hofs than the 80s.

Kareem was in his prime in the 70's but he was still the top 2 Center in the NBA throughout the 80's. Also Dr.J won his only NBA MVP award and NBA Championship in the 80's. And there is no doubt Moses Malone was in his prime in the 80's.

Jabbar 1980 NBA MVP
Erving 1981 NBA MVP
M. Malone 1982 & 1983 NBA MVP

[Sir Charles]

and i have a question for you were do you put players like magic, bird, jabaar, malone, dr. j, and parrish as far as decade? because they were all drafted in the 70s

Magic and Bird are 1979-80 so the 1980 season is part of it in the Play-Offs they are 80s drafted pretty much too. They only came 5 years before the greatest draft ever, the 1984 draft: Hakeem, Jordan, Barkley, Stockton..

Parish, Jabbar, Moses and the DR are 70s players but till part of the Golden 1980s because they where part of Championship Contending Teams in the 80s and in the case od Parish and Kareem 1987 to 1989.

The Doctor kept pulling in 20 ppg, 5 rpg and 5 aspg till about 1985. Even though Past His Prime he still kept rocking! :rockon:

Parish kept pulling in 15-21 ppg at 55% FG% or mor and 10 rpg till 1989. :rockon:

Moses was the leagues leading rebounder in the early 80s to go along an average of 31 to 20 ppg till 1989 :rockon:

Kareem kept scoring over 20 ppg at 53 to 59.9% FG% til 1986. :rockon:

Yes they where not in their Prime. Except for maybe Moses and Parish in the early 80s but they kept Schooling Big Time till 1989 :confusedshrug:

Shaq was an 90s player but he kept ruling and dominating the early 2000s. So that also makes him both a 90s Player and a 2000s Dominating Star Player:)

[miles berg]

It was actually the mid 90's where the NBA started to sink. MJ wasn't in the NBA in 93-94 & 94-95 then when MJ came back in 95-96 the NBA added 2 new teams to the NBA which lowerd competition a bit.

The NBA started sucking in the 1994 season and as just now starting to recover. '94-'99 was horrible, horrible basketball. The greatness of MJ overshadowed just how overrated and bad the NBA was then.

'80-'93 was the golden era for the NBA. Hopefully someday we can get back to those types of days.

[miles berg]

that may be so but alot of players playing at a hof level were injured by the 2000 decade hardaway, and hill to name a few. then you did not mention iverson, mourning, mutombo, rodman, garnett, richmond, miller, and webber. then, some of the guys you mentioned in the 80s list made it more for their contributions in the 70s jabaar, erving, and malone. kareem was a good center in the 80-85 years and a decent center in the later 80s.

so from that view the 90s had more hofs than the 80s.

Do you count Shaq and Duncan and as 90s or 00s? Dirk and KG, 90s or 00s? Iverson & Kobe, 90s or 00s?

Is it when they were drafted or when they dominated? I just named 6 first ballot HOFers but the line is very gray. Shaq dominated the 90s and the 00s, where does he go?

[97 bulls]

Dwayne Wade has already won a championship and was a Finals MVP and Lebron took his team to a championship in '07. Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili were drafted this decade and a huge part of 3 championship teams.

this is true but like i said there is an exception to every rule. for the most part this decade is dominated by players drafted in the 90s. and i also said that the more things change the more they stay the same. sam cassel was a rookie and a huge part of the rockets back to back championships. toni kukoc was in his third year and was an integral part of the bulls championship teams
shaq and penny made it to the finals in their 2nd and third years.

in the 80s olajuwan made it to the chip in only his third season i believe

[1987_Lakers]

this is true but like i said there is an exception to every rule. for the most part this decade is dominated by players drafted in the 90s. and i also said that the more things change the more they stay the same. sam cassel was a rookie and a huge part of the rockets back to back championships. toni kukoc was in his third year and was an integral part of the bulls championship teams
shaq and penny made it to the finals in their 2nd and third years.

in the 80s olajuwan made it to the chip in only his third season i believe

Olajuwan made it to the championship in his 2nd season.

[1987_Lakers]

The NBA started sucking in the 1994 season and as just now starting to recover. '94-'99 was horrible, horrible basketball. The greatness of MJ overshadowed just how overrated and bad the NBA was then.

'80-'93 was the golden era for the NBA. Hopefully someday we can get back to those types of days.

:rockon:

[Sir Charles]

:banghead:
The NBA started sucking in the 1994 season and as just now starting to recover. '94-'99 was horrible, horrible basketball. The greatness of MJ overshadowed just how overrated and bad the NBA was then.

'80-'93 was the golden era for the NBA. Hopefully someday we can get back to those types of days.

I agree with you that Jordan had quite easy in the early 90s but the 90s still where greater than the 2000s.

Even the late 90s!:rockon: .

In the late 90s you still had:

Iverson
Shaq
Webber
Kemp
Kidd
G.Hill
Vin Baker (Could have been Greater)
Kevin Jhonson
Jordan
Pippen
Rodman
Hakeem
Malone
Stockton
Robinson
Drexler
Hardaway
Miller
Ewing

Along many Great 1980s Roll Players like: Chambers, Hornacek, Shremp, Oakley, Perkins, Marlie, Harper, Paxon, Thrope, Kenny Smith, Rick Smiths etc..

Plus upcoming Stars like:

Duncan
Garnett
Bryant
Pierce

etc...


Even the Late 90s was better than the **** I see today:( but ofcourse nothign will ever surpass

The Legendary 1980s and Early 90s (Still the Dominationg of the 1980s Drafted Players till 1999!).

Nothing Ever!:confusedshrug:

[nycelt84]

this is true but like i said there is an exception to every rule. for the most part this decade is dominated by players drafted in the 90s. and i also said that the more things change the more they stay the same. sam cassel was a rookie and a huge part of the rockets back to back championships. toni kukoc was in his third year and was an integral part of the bulls championship teams
shaq and penny made it to the finals in their 2nd and third years.

in the 80s olajuwan made it to the chip in only his third season i believe

Sam Cassell and Toni Kukoc are nowhere near the level of James, Wade, Paul. Thats a terrible comparison.

[1987_Lakers]

Sam Cassell and Toni Kukoc are nowhere near the level of James, Wade, Paul. Thats a terrible comparison.

Earlier in the thread he compared Webber and Hardaway to Magic and Barkley:roll: .

[Sir Charles]

Sam Cassell and Toni Kukoc are nowhere near the level of James, Wade, Paul. Thats a terrible comparison.

Kukoc was an All Time Underrated Player!. A 6`11 ft fundamental Smallforward with better ball handling , scoring abilities and even passing ablities than many or most of the SGs a that I see today :rolleyes:. Just go look at the 1992 Barcelona Olympic Games and against the Dream Team and you will realize what I say. This man could have scored over 20 ppg and 5-6 aspg to go along 6-7 rpg for most of his career if he played in a weaker team which relied on him as the Main Focus in his Prime.

In the Bulls he was not the Main Top Scorer and Game Creator because those elements belonged to Jordan and Scottie. Still Kocok was the best 6th man in the league in the early 90s and a Top SF. Toni was a Missmatch for any SF guarding him and some PFs when facing the Bulls in the Mid 90s. Too tall for SFs to guard (hed just shoot or post them up and score) and too Quick and Talented for PFs!.

He would have been drafteted in 1989-90 too

I am one of those people that firmly believed Toni should have been a starter SF in those Bulls line ups in the 90s.

C: Longley/Wellington
PF: Rodman
SF: Kucok
SG-PG: Jordan
PG-SG: Pippen

[Sir Charles]

Earlier in the thread he compared Webber and Hardaway to Magic and Barkley:roll: .

Guys that are comperable to Magic are Big O, Stockton, Isiah and Kid. Thats about it.

Guys comperable to Barkley are Malone or Duncan. Thats about it.

Still only Big O would compete with Magic and nowbody would compete with Chalres in his Prime 1985 to 1995. Not eve close:rolleyes: :confusedshrug:

[97 bulls]

Do you count Shaq and Duncan and as 90s or 00s? Dirk and KG, 90s or 00s? Iverson & Kobe, 90s or 00s?

Is it when they were drafted or when they dominated? I just named 6 first ballot HOFers but the line is very gray. Shaq dominated the 90s and the 00s, where does he go?
truthfully, i dont know. my thing is that there isnt much of a difference. all eras had great players obviously some better than others. i really dont know how you can say one era is better than another because of when certain players were drafted. because all careers overlap decades so really its a no win situation. im more interested in why 80s proponents are so hell bent on belittleing the 90s ans 00s. i mean, i remember the 80s and as far as style id say the 80s is the more exciting.but the 80s had their weaknesses too. rampant drug abuse and inflated stats due to pace dont help the 80s.

as far as competition the bulls never really had a team as great as them in my opinion, they were the greatest team assembled best player ever, best defensive player ever, the best rebounder ever, statisticly, the best 3pt shooter ever one of the best european players ever. one of the best benches ever and the best coach ever. and heres were i differ with alot of people its not a knock on the teams they played against or insufficient competition, they were just better than everyone else. if the bulls never existed then there would be a similar magic bird rivalry probably between shaq and olajuwan and barkley and malone. which would mean that you would probably have to give a couple more mvps and a multiple championships to those players which would make them in the same argument with magic and bird.

[miles berg]

:banghead:

I agree with you that Jordan had quite easy in the early 90s but the 90s still where greater than the 2000s.

Even the late 90s!:rockon: .

In the late 90s you still had:

Iverson
Shaq
Webber
Kemp
Kidd
G.Hill
Vin Baker (Could have been Greater)
Kevin Jhonson
Jordan
Pippen
Rodman
Hakeem
Malone
Stockton
Robinson
Drexler
Hardaway
Miller
Ewing



You can do that for nearly any era. I mean, I can make a laundry list of players right now:

LeBron James
Tim Duncan
Kobe Bryant
Dirk Nowitzki
Kevin Garnett
Paul Pierce
Tracy McGrady
Dwyane Wade
Chris Paul
Deron Williams
Steve Nash
Amare Stoudemire
Dwight Howard
Yao Ming
Elton Brand
Baron Davis
Allen Iverson
Jason Kidd
Ray Allen
Carlos Boozer

That's just 20 guys off of the top of my head that are absolute superstars.

Carmelo Anthony, Jermaine ONeal, Chris Bosh, Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, Vince Carter, Richard Jefferson, Joe Johnson, Josh Smith, Andre Iguodala, Ron Artest, Kevin Martin, Brandon Roy, Al Jefferson, Rudy Gay, etc....the list is just so long, not to mention young superstars like Greg Oden, Kevin Durant, & Derrick Rose that have yet to make their mark on the league.

[miles berg]

Guys that are comperable to Magic are Big O, Stockton, Isiah and Kid. Thats about it.

Guys comperable to Barkley are Malone or Duncan. Thats about it.

Still only Big O would compete with Magic and nowbody would compete with Chalres in his Prime 1985 to 1995. Not eve close:rolleyes: :confusedshrug:

Please, Tim Duncan, Dirk Nowitzki, and Amare Stoudemire would all drop 35+ on a prime Barkley, right now. No way in hell he could guard those guys. Everyone wants to live in the past but the guys today are better than any era of NBA players ever and the NBA today is the best it has been since '93. It took a decade to get over expansion and salary caps and all the free agency and stuff but todays NBA is loaded with some of the greatest players to ever play in this league.

[97 bulls]

Sam Cassell and Toni Kukoc are nowhere near the level of James, Wade, Paul. Thats a terrible comparison.
i was comparing those two players to ginobli and parker. two players who were integral parts of championships in their early years olajuwan was also in that post. when did i compare them to james, wade, and paul

[shaoyut]

bulls were just too good with the goat pippen kukoc and the goat rebounder and good bench guys

[miles berg]

Well, I take that back. Any era with Jordan, Magic, and Bird all dominating is the best, atleast so far. There have never been 3 guys in the league at the same time as great as those three were. Not all dominating at the same time like they did.

Thats why the 80s were so great.

[nycelt84]

Kukoc was an All Time Underrated Player!. A 6`11 ft fundamental Smallforward with better ball handling , scoring abilities and even passing ablities than many or most of the SGs a that I see today :rolleyes:. Just go look at the 1992 Barcelona Olympic Games and against the Dream Team and you will realize what I say. This man could have scored over 20 ppg and 5-6 aspg to go along 6-7 rpg for most of his career if he played in a weaker team which relied on him as the Main Focus in his Prime.

In the Bulls he was not the Main Top Scorer and Game Creator because those elements belonged to Jordan and Scottie. Still Kocok was the best 6th man in the league in the early 90s and a Top SF. Toni was a Missmatch for any SF guarding him and some PFs when facing the Bulls in the Mid 90s. Too tall for SFs to guard (hed just shoot or post them up and score) and too Quick and Talented for PFs!.

He would have been drafteted in 1989-90 too

I am one of those people that firmly believed Toni should have been a starter SF in those Bulls line ups in the 90s.

C: Longley/Wellington
PF: Rodman
SF: Kucok
SG-PG: Jordan
PG-SG: Pippen

So what if he's underrated, he's nowhere near as being as good as Chris Paul, Lebron James or D-Wade. His best season is not as good as either of their worst seasons.

[97 bulls]

Earlier in the thread he compared Webber and Hardaway to Magic and Barkley:roll: .
im not the only person to compare the two.

[97 bulls]

Kukoc was an All Time Underrated Player!. A 6`11 ft fundamental Smallforward with better ball handling , scoring abilities and even passing ablities than many or most of the SGs a that I see today :rolleyes:. Just go look at the 1992 Barcelona Olympic Games and against the Dream Team and you will realize what I say. This man could have scored over 20 ppg and 5-6 aspg to go along 6-7 rpg for most of his career if he played in a weaker team which relied on him as the Main Focus in his Prime.

In the Bulls he was not the Main Top Scorer and Game Creator because those elements belonged to Jordan and Scottie. Still Kocok was the best 6th man in the league in the early 90s and a Top SF. Toni was a Missmatch for any SF guarding him and some PFs when facing the Bulls in the Mid 90s. Too tall for SFs to guard (hed just shoot or post them up and score) and too Quick and Talented for PFs!.

He would have been drafteted in 1989-90 too

I am one of those people that firmly believed Toni should have been a starter SF in those Bulls line ups in the 90s.

C: Longley/Wellington
PF: Rodman
SF: Kucok
SG-PG: Jordan
PG-SG: Pippen

i firmly agree he would have been a 20 7 and 7 guy as a stater

[97 bulls]

So what if he's underrated, he's nowhere near as being as good as Chris Paul, Lebron James or D-Wade. His best season is not as good as either of their worst seasons.

no one said he was. and if you took it like that i apologize

[Sir Charles]

You can do that for nearly any era. I mean, I can make a laundry list of players right now:

LeBron James
Tim Duncan
Kobe Bryant
Dirk Nowitzki
Kevin Garnett
Paul Pierce
Tracy McGrady
Dwyane Wade
Chris Paul
Deron Williams
Steve Nash
Amare Stoudemire
Dwight Howard
Yao Ming
Elton Brand
Baron Davis
Allen Iverson
Jason Kidd
Ray Allen
Carlos Boozer

That's just 20 guys off of the top of my head that are absolute superstars.

Carmelo Anthony, Jermaine ONeal, Chris Bosh, Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, Vince Carter, Richard Jefferson, Joe Johnson, Josh Smith, Andre Iguodala, Ron Artest, Kevin Martin, Brandon Roy, Al Jefferson, Rudy Gay, etc....the list is just so long, not to mention young superstars like Greg Oden, Kevin Durant, & Derrick Rose that have yet to make their mark on the league.

Question for you.

Would any of those teams beat The Best Selection Team of the late 90s?

C: Shaq (Hakeem/Robinson, Mutumbo)
PF: Malone (Webber, Barkley, Duncan, Garnett, Kemp, Rodman)
SF: Pippen (Grant Hill...)
PG: Stockton (Kidd, Penny Hardaway..)
SG: Jordan (Iverson...)

:no:

Would Any of those Teams Beat The Best Selection Team of the Late 80s and Early 90s?

C: Hakeem (Robinson, Ewing, Kareem, Moses, Eaton, Laimbeer, Brad Daugherty, Shaq)
PF: Barkley (Malone, McHale, healthy Ralph Samson or Derrick Coleman, Rodman, Oakley, Mahorn)
SF: Bird (Wilkins, Worthy, Pippen, Tom Chambers, Alex English...)
PG: Magic (Stockton, Isiah, KJ, Tim Hardaway, Sidney Moncrief)
SG: Jordan (Drexler, Bernarding King, Dumars, Rolando Blackman, Dantley)

:hammerhead:

:violin:

[23jordan23]

Amen, but don`t say Jordan Dominanted. Say the JORDAN-PIPPEN DUO DOMINATED and With A Great All Around Team :rolleyes:

Then Again in 1996 The Bulls Won Again With An 80s Based Drafted Team!

Jordan: 1984 SUPERSTAR
Pippen: 1988 SUPERSTAR
Harper: 1986 (All Star Caliber for 5-6 over 20 ppg and A Top Defensive SG)
Rodman: 1986 All-Star. Defensive Player of The Year and Top Rebounder of the 90s


Sorry...but...

Kevin Jhonson is an 80s Player. Drafted in 1987 :)
Tim Hardaway is an 80s Player. Drafted in 1989 (at age 23, could have been drafter earlier maybe) :)

And Yes, David Robinson was drafted in 1989. He is 80s not 90s :no: and could have probaly entered the NBA even earlier in 1986 at age 21 but he decided to finish his Marine etc:)


On the other Hand. Yes 90s Was An Era of Marketing but 80s was More Passionete and Fan-Like by Far. Fans in the 80s Where Also More Blind and Rivalries Were Way Superior to the 90s :)

1980s Rocks:pimp:


I made my list in a general sense..when I think of jordan for example I think of 80's...the mj with hair tongue wagging and sky walking (althought that wasnt MJ in his prime,which was later in the 90s )

But when you think of say Kevin Johson and a Tim HArdaway...I understand they may have been drafted (late) 80's but they are pretty much 90s era players...same can be said for David Robinson.

I mean i guess it boils down everyones opinion ..and thats just mine..

And last but not least,Jordan Dominated the NBA ..no if's/ but's /questions... in the 90s ask the knicks..Spurs..Blazers..Suns and all the other ringless Hall Of Famers etc..Jordan was dominant with a perfect cast of teammates who knew they're role and played within the system.

[Sir Charles]

truthfully, i dont know. my thing is that there isnt much of a difference. all eras had great players obviously some better than others. i really dont know how you can say one era is better than another because of when certain players were drafted. because all careers overlap decades so really its a no win situation. im more interested in why 80s proponents are so hell bent on belittleing the 90s ans 00s. i mean, i remember the 80s and as far as style id say the 80s is the more exciting.but the 80s had their weaknesses too. rampant drug abuse and inflated stats due to pace dont help the 80s.

as far as competition the bulls never really had a team as great as them in my opinion, they were the greatest team assembled best player ever, best defensive player ever, the best rebounder ever, statisticly, the best 3pt shooter ever one of the best european players ever. one of the best benches ever and the best coach ever. and heres were i differ with alot of people its not a knock on the teams they played against or insufficient competition, they were just better than everyone else. if the bulls never existed then there would be a similar magic bird rivalry probably between shaq and olajuwan and barkley and malone. which would mean that you would probably have to give a couple more mvps and a multiple championships to those players which would make them in the same argument with magic and bird.

If There where no Bird-Magic and Jordans in the late 80s and early 90s Hakeem, Barkley, Malone, Ewing, Robinson, Pippen, Drexler, Stockton, Wilkins etc would have been winning MVPs like Crazy. And if these dudes played in their 20s and early 30s today they would win every MVP over Iverson, Bryant, Duncan, Garnett, Pierce, Ming, Shaq, Lebron James etc.

Only 2 Players that would stand out would beShaq and Lebron James:confusedshrug:

[Sir Charles]

I made my list in a general sense..when I think of jordan for example I think of 80's...the mj with hair tongue wagging and sky walking (althought that wasnt MJ in his prime,which was later in the 90s )

But when you think of say Kevin Johson and a Tim HArdaway...I understand they may have been drafted (late) 80's but they are pretty much 90s era players...same can be said for David Robinson.

I mean i guess it boils down everyones opinion ..and thats just mine..

And last but not least,Jordan Dominated the NBA ..no if's/ but's /questions... in the 90s ask the knicks..Spurs..Blazers..Suns and all the other ringless Hall Of Famers etc..Jordan was dominant with a perfect cast of teammates who knew they're role and played within the system.

Sory dude but Jordan was Prime by 1986-87 season at age 23 and was 26 in 1989-90. Phyisically he was even PRIMER in the LATE 80s than the 90s. He could leap higher, was faster, quicker, more unstoppable in the 1 on 1 situation absolutley impossible to Guard with handchecking rules and real fauls etc. Jordan later on became a smarter, more wittiy player and developed a better fadeaway shot but in terms of Unstoppablenss he was Primer in the Late 80s :confusedshrug:

[1987_Lakers]

I think most people acknowledge that the 80's was the greatest era in NBA history. I mean back in those days you needed 3 HOFers to even think about making the NBA Finals. Players were much more fundamentally sound in the 80's than they were in the 90's and today. By 1996 the NBA expanded by 25%. If you even had 1 HOF player on your team in the 90's it was almost a guarantee playoff spot while in the 80's 1 HOF player might not get you into the playoffs. The talent in the 80's was just amazing and we will never see another decade like that again. The Rivalries were 100x better in the 80's than in the 90's. You had Celtics vs Sixers in the early 80's. Lakers vs Celtics throughout the whole decade. And Celtics vs Pistons in the late 80's. You also had 3 of the greatest players of all time playing in the mid 80's. Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, and Michael Jordan. Those 3 players won atleast 1 MVP award in the 80's. 4 out of the 10 greatest teams in NBA history played in the 80's. The '83 Sixers, '86 Celtics, '87 Lakers , and '89 Pistons. Anyone who doesn't think the 80's were the greatest decade in NBA history really needs a history lesson.

[L.Kizzle]

Here is another way to look at it. Lets list some of the 2nd and 3rd tier stars from each decade (some that haven't even been mentioned) and see which were better.


'80s
Fat Lever
Micheal Ray Richardson
Otis Birdsong
Walter Davis
Gus Williams
Buck Williams
Kiki Vandeghe
Norm Nixon
Reggie Theus
Marques Johnson
Alvin Robertson
Mo Cheeks
Larry Nance

Now,compare with 2nd and 3rd tier '90s All-Stars


'90s
Horace Grant
Mookie Blaylock
John Starks
Terrell Brandon
Larry Johnson
Tom Gugliotta
Otis Thorpe
Dan Majerle
Terry Porter
Kevin Duckworth
Danny Manning
Sean Elliot
Glen Rice


Now, which group of star players is better?

[97 bulls]

If There where no Bird-Magic and Jordans in the late 80s and early 90s Hakeem, Barkley, Malone, Ewing, Robinson, Pippen, Drexler, Stockton, Wilkins etc would have been winning MVPs like Crazy. And if these dudes played in their 20s and early 30s today they would win every MVP over Iverson, Bryant, Duncan, Garnett, Pierce, Ming, Shaq, Lebron James etc.

Only 2 Players that would stand out would beShaq and Lebron James:confusedshrug:

if your talking about the whole decade i would say that shaq early 00s td and kobe would have something to say about that mvps and championships aainst all those other teams. but obviously jordan is in another world.

[1987_Lakers]

Here is another way to look at it. Lets list some of the 2nd and 3rd tier stars from each decade (some that haven't even been mentioned) and see which were better.


'80s
Fat Lever
Micheal Ray Richardson
Otis Birdsong
Walter Davis
Gus Williams
Buck Williams
Kiki Vandeghe
Norm Nixon
Reggie Theus
Marques Johnson
Alvin Robertson
Mo Cheeks
Larry Nance

Now,compare with 2nd and 3rd tier '90s All-Stars


'90s
Horace Grant
Mookie Blaylock
John Starks
Terrell Brandon
Larry Johnson
Tom Gugliotta
Otis Thorpe
Dan Majerle
Terry Porter
Kevin Duckworth
Danny Manning
Sean Elliot
Glen Rice


Now, which group of star players is better?

80's:rockon:

[72-10]

Please, Tim Duncan, Dirk Nowitzki, and Amare Stoudemire would all drop 35+ on a prime Barkley, right now. No way in hell he could guard those guys. Everyone wants to live in the past but the guys today are better than any era of NBA players ever and the NBA today is the best it has been since '93. It took a decade to get over expansion and salary caps and all the free agency and stuff but todays NBA is loaded with some of the greatest players to ever play in this league.

Pretty much everything you just said is wrong.:rolleyes:

[72-10]

Sory dude but Jordan was Prime by 1986-87 season at age 23 and was 26 in 1989-90. Phyisically he was even PRIMER in the LATE 80s than the 90s. He could leap higher, was faster, quicker, more unstoppable in the 1 on 1 situation absolutley impossible to Guard with handchecking rules and real fauls etc. Jordan later on became a smarter, more wittiy player and developed a better fadeaway shot but in terms of Unstoppablenss he was Primer in the Late 80s :confusedshrug:

Jordan's prime could best be defined as 1988-1992, which inconveniently is evenly divided between the 80s and 90s.

[97 bulls]

I think most people acknowledge that the 80's was the greatest era in NBA history. I mean back in those days you needed 3 HOFers to even think about making the NBA Finals. Players were much more fundamentally sound in the 80's than they were in the 90's and today. By 1996 the NBA expanded by 25%. If you even had 1 HOF player on your team in the 90's it was almost a guarantee playoff spot while in the 80's 1 HOF player might not get you into the playoffs. The talent in the 80's was just amazing and we will never see another decade like that again. The Rivalries were 100x better in the 80's than in the 90's. You had Celtics vs Sixers in the early 80's. Lakers vs Celtics throughout the whole decade. And Celtics vs Pistons in the late 80's. You also had 3 of the greatest players of all time playing in the mid 80's. Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, and Michael Jordan. Those 3 players won atleast 1 MVP award in the 80's. 4 out of the 10 greatest teams in NBA history played in the 80's. The '83 Sixers, '86 Celtics, '87 Lakers , and '89 Pistons. Anyone who doesn't think the 80's were the greatest decade in NBA history really needs a history lesson.

here we go again. now, if your talking about popularity by your "most fans " statement then its 90s hands down. the 90s had higher ratings. and as far as hofers on teams, if your talking about careers then the 97 bulls have at least 4 players that are going to the hall or are in(jordan, pippen rodman, and parrish) not to mention kukoc might get in based on his accomplishments. but how many of those teams had players playing at a hof level for every year? i mean, was kareem really playing at a hof level in 87 and 88? i believe without looking that he averaged about 15-17 points and 6-7 rebounds as a third option behind worthy and scott. the celtics had 3 hof but remember mchale was a 6th man for 2 of their 3 championships. the pistons probably will have 3 players with hof careers but while they were winning only two. or how about the sixers, i know they had only 2 and i feel that was the best team in the 80s.now, the bulls had three players in the 96-98 teams all palying at a hof level. so to sum it up all those teams you mention only had about 2 players playn at a hof level.

[97 bulls]

Jordan's prime could best be defined as 1988-1992, which inconveniently is evenly divided between the 80s and 90s.

no, jordans prime was from the time he was drafted to the time he retired as a bull the second time. i mean, he was the MVP in 98 for goodness sake. now if you to say athlecticly then absolutely he was in his prime in from his rookie season to 93.

[97 bulls]

Pretty much everything you just said is wrong.:rolleyes:

i agree the 00s have prouced some terrible teams to make it to the finals the iverson sixers, and the kidd nets.

[72-10]

What I don't like about this thread is that "the 80s" aren't considered an era. There is an era that is considered the best in basketball history, but it includes most of both decades, such cutoffs range from as far as the drafting of Magic and Bird (1980 season) to Jordan's retirement from the Bulls (1998 season), or Jordan's drafting (1985 season) to his first retirement (1993 season). You could argue that the most competitive years were the late 1980s, 87, 88, 89, but the early 90s are just a step behind it.

[72-10]

no, jordans prime was from the time he was drafted to the time he retired as a bull the second time. i mean, he was the MVP in 98 for goodness sake. now if you to say athlecticly then absolutely he was in his prime in from his rookie season to 93.

Jordan was the best player in the world for nearly his entire career, I'm just saying that he played his best basketball from about 88-92.

[Sir Charles]

if your talking about the whole decade i would say that shaq early 00s td and kobe would have something to say about that mvps and championships aainst all those other teams. but obviously jordan is in another world.

But if Shaq played withought Penny Hardaway-Grant or Bryant and would have had no Stars and Not the Greatest of Supporting Casts as did Barkley, Hakeem, Drexler, Ewing, Robinson, Wilkins etc for Various Years I dont think he would have elavated the level of his teams as these others did (becase these dudes where more All Around with the exception of Ewing and Wilkins although Wilkins was CLUTCH and Ewing a Major Leader, inspirer!). So then = only Shaq would get 1 MVP out of them 2 (Shaq and Bryant), while these others dudes: if Bird-Magic and Jordan where not there = would have won each of them 2-3 or 4 MVPs for their intiire whole NBA Careers :).

Let me remined you that Dominique Wilkins was way more unstoppable than Bryant, better rebounder and way way! way! more Clutch. He played in a tougher era and conference all by himself pretty much and had major battles with the Bad Boys, Jordan and Bird .:rockon: :confusedshrug:

[Sir Charles]

Jordan's prime could best be defined as 1988-1992, which inconveniently is evenly divided between the 80s and 90s.

Jordans Prime was 1986-1993. Look at the Stats:) and Look at both his Phyisicall and Mental Abilities Combined (along experience).

Post 1993 = Jordan was not as Athletic or Unstoppable (tyring) to Guard
Pre 1986 = Jordan was not as Experienced and Tough Minded.

Then again...

1-When did he suffer most to Win? 1980s! :) = Better Era, Better Teams, Better Players, No Handchecking, Real Fauls etc.

2-And, When did he have it easiest? 1990s = Celtics were Aged. Lakers did not have a Kareem at his best and Worthy was not in the level of Pippen (he could not make teamatest better). Obviously the Celtics were WAY past their Prime in the 90s and Pistons finally aged with most of them in their 30s and Yes 30s is the age era where you loose Begin to Loose: Speed, Potence, Agility etc of things needed for an absolutely PHYSICALLY DEPENDING DEFENSIVE TEAM:)

Jordan`s only Real Competition was Barkley and Hakeem in the early 90s. While in the 80s he had these 2 (Barkley and Hakeem) plus Magic (and all of his Great Supporting Cast and other Older but Still Legends), plus Bird (and all of his Great Supporting Cast and other Older but Still Legends), plus Dominique Wilkins, plus Isiah (and his Bad Boys), plus Drexler, plus Stockton-Malone-Eaton, plus the Cavs, plus the Bucks and the Knicks (the only one in the East that put up real battes in the early 90s).

1980s = Greatest Era in NBA History. Period. End of Discussion:rockon: :confusedshrug:

[97 bulls]

But if Shaq played withought Penny Hardaway-Grant or Bryant and would have had no Stars and Not the Greatest of Supporting Casts as did Barkley, Hakeem, Drexler, Ewing, Robinson, Wilkins etc for Various Years I dont think he would have elavated the level of his teams as these others did (becase these dudes where more All Around with the exception of Ewing and Wilkins although Wilkins was CLUTCH and Ewing a Major Leader, inspirer!). So then = only Shaq would get 1 MVP out of them 2 (Shaq and Bryant), while these others dudes: if Bird-Magic and Jordan where not there = would have won each of them 2-3 or 4 MVPs for their intiire whole NBA Careers :).

Let me remined you that Dominique Wilkins was way more unstoppable than Bryant, better rebounder and way way! way! more Clutch. He played in a tougher era and conference all by himself pretty much and had major battles with the Bad Boys, Jordan and Bird .:rockon: :confusedshrug:

i really want to respond to this but i dont understand it:confusedshrug:

[1987_Lakers]

here we go again. now, if your talking about popularity by your "most fans " statement then its 90s hands down. the 90s had higher ratings. and as far as hofers on teams, if your talking about careers then the 97 bulls have at least 4 players that are going to the hall or are in(jordan, pippen rodman, and parrish) not to mention kukoc might get in based on his accomplishments. but how many of those teams had players playing at a hof level for every year? i mean, was kareem really playing at a hof level in 87 and 88? i believe without looking that he averaged about 15-17 points and 6-7 rebounds as a third option behind worthy and scott. the celtics had 3 hof but remember mchale was a 6th man for 2 of their 3 championships. the pistons probably will have 3 players with hof careers but while they were winning only two. or how about the sixers, i know they had only 2 and i feel that was the best team in the 80s.now, the bulls had three players in the 96-98 teams all palying at a hof level. so to sum it up all those teams you mention only had about 2 players playn at a hof level.

LOL. you gotta be kidding me. Parish was 100 years old in '97 and Rodman will not make the HOF. Those Bulls only had 2 HOFers.

The Lakers and Celtics of 80's were more deeper than the Bulls of the 90's. Any one who argues that doesn't know basketball.

[Sir Charles]

i really want to respond to this but i dont understand it:confusedshrug:

What I say is that in the 80s the Stars were all seen as Good and More Equal because it was More Competitive, Teams Had Better Supporting Casts, There where Rivalries and More Hall of Famers and Great Players co
mingled and played together.

In the early 90 = Celtics Aged, Lakers Aged and Pistons Aged so it was Jordan-Pippen`s turn but then again Jordan-Pippen had no Real Great Competition as they did in the 80s: Pistons, Sixers, Bucks, Cavs were done:

Post 1990 it was pretty much just the Knicks for the the Bulls as a true competitor.

What I also say is that All those players I mentioned. Barkley, Hakeem, Malone, Stockton, Drexler, Wilkins, Isiah etc in THEIR PRIME would have won more MVPs than Shaq and Bryant because they NOT ONLY DOMINATED THEIR POSITIONS and WHERE ONSTOPPABLE BUT THEY WHERE CLUTCH, THEY WHERE ALL AROUND and they PLAYED WAY TOUGHER!. BACK THEN YOU HAD TO KILL TO WIN BECAUSE IT WAS WAY MORE COMPETITIVE with the LAKERS-CELTICS AND PISTONS Dominating.

1980s = Best Era in NBA History:bowdown:

Second= Early 90. Composed of 80s Drafted Stars Dominating til 1999

Third Best Era in NBA History is 2000s and 1970s

[Sir Charles]

LOL. you gotta be kidding me. Parish was 100 years old in '97 and Rodman will not make the HOF. Those Bulls only had 2 HOFers.

The Lakers and Celtics of 80's were more deeper than the Bulls of the 90's. Any one who argues that doesn't know basketball.

Parish in his PRIME was a 17-20 ppg, 10-11 rpg at 55-60% FG player. He would not be guardable by Wellington or Longley

McHale in his PRIME would be unguardable in the Post. Not even Rodman could Stop his 6'10 (longed 7`2 like arms) Post Moves (more Post Moves than Russell has Championships, plus had Witts). Remember tHey had to put in Kareem or another CENTER to Stop his Moves in the 80s Finals and his Career FG% is 56% 17-19 ppg in 31-33 minutes of play only! (while Bird being the Main Focal Scoring Point not McHale)

And Bird in his PRIME could not be stopped from scoring,. shooting, assisting and make his teams better in Any Era. He even schooled Pippen until he was 35 yeard old and there is Proof in youtube. Both Pippen and Grant could not stop him from getting high 30s and Triple DOuble Figures.

The Celtics in their PRIME would only be beatable by the 80s Lakers Show Time.

Except for 1986 Celtics = The Greatest Team Ever!

[97 bulls]

Jordans Prime was 1986-1993. Look at the Stats:) and Look at both his Phyisicall and Mental Abilities Combined (along experience).

Post 1993 = Jordan was not as Athletic or Unstoppable (tyring) to Guard
Pre 1986 = Jordan was not as Experienced and Tough Minded.

Then again...

1-When did he suffer most to Win? 1980s! :) = Better Era, Better Teams, Better Players, No Handchecking, Real Fauls etc.

2-And, When did he have it easiest? 1990s = Celtics were Aged. Lakers did not have a Kareem at his best and Worthy was not in the level of Pippen (he could not make teamatest better). Obviously the Celtics were WAY past their Prime in the 90s and Pistons finally aged with most of them in their 30s and Yes 30s is the age era where you loose Begin to Loose: Speed, Potence, Agility etc of things needed for an absolutely PHYSICALLY DEPENDING DEFENSIVE TEAM:)

Jordan`s only Real Competition was Barkley and Hakeem in the early 90s. While in the 80s he had these 2 (Barkley and Hakeem) plus Magic (and all of his Great Supporting Cast and other Older but Still Legends), plus Bird (and all of his Great Supporting Cast and other Older but Still Legends), plus Dominique Wilkins, plus Isiah (and his Bad Boys), plus Drexler, plus Stockton-Malone-Eaton, plus the Cavs, plus the Bucks and the Knicks (the only one in the East that put up real battes in the early 90s).

1980s = Greatest Era in NBA History. Period. End of Discussion:rockon: :confusedshrug:

once again jordan made it to the ecf without a great team. scottie was not ready yet and neither was grant. when they finally won in 91, the pistons werent old, i think their average age was 30-31 for core guys. and as far as the lakers, magic was the reigning backtoback mvp 89-90 before jordan took it back in 91. worthy had his best scoring season, and even though they didnt have kareem they actually got more out of their threesome of sam perkins and mychal thompson and divac. scott wasnt old neither was green i think their core guys average was 29-30. the bulls just finally came of age. however, they didnt have coop. but i dont think that would have turned a 4-1 series for the bulls into a win for the lakers. and as far as the 90s , hey the bulls were just better. you have no basis to prove otherwise.

[Sir Charles]

once again jordan made it to the ecf without a great team. scottie was not ready yet and neither was grant. when they finally won in 91, the pistons werent old, i think their average age was 30-31 for core guys. and as far as the lakers, magic was the reigning backtoback mvp 89-90 before jordan took it back in 91. worthy had his best scoring season, and even though they didnt have kareem they actually got more out of their threesome of sam perkins and mychal thompson and divac. scott wasnt old neither was green i think their core guys average was 29-30. the bulls just finally came of age. however, they didnt have coop. but i dont think that would have turned a 4-1 series for the bulls into a win for the lakers. and as far as the 90s , hey the bulls were just better. you have no basis to prove otherwise.

Listen dude. I just prooved to you that those 3 playes would be unguardable easily:confusedshrug: by any Bulls Frontline of the 90s. And then again. McHale-Parish and Bird would not only Dominate Offensively but McHale and Parish would dominante Longley/Wellington or Grant/Rodman in the boards plus would also block more shots! than these dudes. If the Bulls had Paxon and Kerr for a 3-Pointer then the Celtics had Ainge and Bird hismelf. Plus they had Dennis DJ, a Clutch Shooter, a strong Defensive 6`5 PG that could Rebound, Play D and make others better. Then they had Maxwell on the beanch a talented on one one Smallforward/Powerfoward type with great speed and skill. You also had coming from the bench, the toughness and experience of Walton, whom could pass like a Guard from is Center spot, Play D and Rebound.

The Bulls would have no Chance, they would have to force to put in a Taller Squad. Scottie would be forced to play PG (this would lessen his Scoring Opportunities! and Jordan would have to do more of them). In the Post they would have to play with anotehr PF along Rodman or Grant (forget the SF Spot) and these two would have major troubles scoring do to lack of talent and guarding Bird-McHale-Parish in their PRIME is only a dream. No contest!

:rolleyes:

[1987_Lakers]

here we go again. now, if your talking about popularity by your "most fans " statement then its 90s hands down. the 90s had higher ratings. and as far as hofers on teams, if your talking about careers then the 97 bulls have at least 4 players that are going to the hall or are in(jordan, pippen rodman, and parrish) not to mention kukoc might get in based on his accomplishments. but how many of those teams had players playing at a hof level for every year? i mean, was kareem really playing at a hof level in 87 and 88? i believe without looking that he averaged about 15-17 points and 6-7 rebounds as a third option behind worthy and scott. the celtics had 3 hof but remember mchale was a 6th man for 2 of their 3 championships. the pistons probably will have 3 players with hof careers but while they were winning only two. or how about the sixers, i know they had only 2 and i feel that was the best team in the 80s.now, the bulls had three players in the 96-98 teams all palying at a hof level. so to sum it up all those teams you mention only had about 2 players playn at a hof level.

BTW we are not talking about popularity we are talking about quality.

Yes, Kareem was past his prime in '87 and '88 but he was still an NBA All-Star Center. Lets not forget he was NBA Finals MVP in '85 at age 38 and dropped 32 Points in the '87 Finals in game 6. Yes, McHale came off the bench early in his career but so what? He was averaging nearly 20 PPG and shooting 55% from the field as the 6th man. If anything that should tell you how deep those 80's Celtics were.

I mean the Bulls starting Center in '96-'98 was Luc Longley.:oldlol: Longley would of been the '86 Celtics #3 Center behind Parish and Walton.

[nycelt84]

Listen dude. I just prooved to you that those 3 playes would be unguardable easily:confusedshrug: by any Bulls Frontline of the 90s. And then again. McHale-Parish and Bird would not only Dominate Offensively but McHale and Parish would dominante Longley/Wellington or Grant/Rodman in the boards plus would also block more shots! than these dudes. If the Bulls had Paxon and Kerr for a 3-Pointer then the Celtics had Ainge and Bird hismelf. Plus they had Dennis DJ, a Clutch Shooter, a strong Defensive 6`5 PG that could Rebound, Play D and make others better. Then they had Maxwell on the beanch a talented on one one Smallforward/Powerfoward type with great speed and skill. You also had coming from the bench, the toughness and experience of Walton, whom could pass like a Guard from is Center spot, Play D and Rebound.

The Bulls would have no Chance, they would have to force to put in a Taller Squad. Scottie would be forced to play PG (this would lessen his Scoring Opportunities! and Jordan would have to do more of them). In the Post they would have to play with anotehr PF along Rodman or Grant (forget the SF Spot) and these two would have major troubles scoring do to lack of talent and guarding Bird-McHale-Parish in their PRIME is only a dream. No contest!

:rolleyes:

Cedric Maxwell never came off the bench when he was with the Celtics, he was always the starter until he suffered a injury during the '85 season he was the guy traded for Bill Walton so they never played together. McHale was the guy off the bench and 6th man of the year in '84 and '85. The '84 Celtics starting lineup was
G Dennis Johnson
G Gerald Henderson
F Larry Bird
F Cedric Maxwell
C Robert Parish

'85 Celtics
G Dennis Johnson
G Danny Ainge
F Larry Bird
F Cedric Maxwell
C Robert Parish

I'm not sure where Dennis Rodman would have had problems since he always played very well against the Celtics and those series were when he was a young player. Pippen would have never played point guard that's inaccurate to suggest that and he was a superb defensive player who would have locked down either Johnson or Ainge.

[1987_Lakers]

Cedric Maxwell never came off the bench when he was with the Celtics, he was always the starter until he suffered a injury during the '85 season he was the guy traded for Bill Walton so they never played together. McHale was the guy off the bench and 6th man of the year in '84 and '85. The '84 Celtics starting lineup was
G Dennis Johnson
G Gerald Henderson
F Larry Bird
F Cedric Maxwell
C Robert Parish

'85 Celtics
G Dennis Johnson
G Danny Ainge
F Larry Bird
F Cedric Maxwell
C Robert Parish

I'm not sure where Dennis Rodman would have had problems since he always played very well against the Celtics and those series were when he was a young player. Pippen would have never played point guard that's inaccurate to suggest that and he was a superb defensive player who would have locked down either Johnson or Ainge.

Just look at the Bulls Centers. '86 Celtics would destroy the Bulls inside.

[miles berg]

Oh, I have little doubt that the '86 Celtics would beat the Bulls.

[1987_Lakers]

Oh, I have little doubt that the '86 Celtics would beat the Bulls.

Oh, I have NO doubt that the '86 Celtics would beat the Bulls.

The 1996 Bulls are more athletic, better defensively on the perimeter with Jordan, Harper, Pippen . Rodman could provide more than capable interior defense and chip in points too. The willowy Kukoc and Kerr both can knock down open Js. The 1986 Celtics with Bird at his peak then are the epitome of toughness. McHale, Parish with a healthy Bill Walton who won Sixth Man of The Year that season as a triumvirate is an overwhelming front line. Dennis Johnson was still an elite defender with the streaky Ainge as his running mate. Sichting and Wedman are as reliable as the Bulls' trio of ivory snipers though Wedman IMO is much better than Buechler any day. The series would probably be the classic OK Corral shootout between Jordan and Bird. Jordan could score on DJ though he will have to work for them to some degree. Same goes with Bird with Pippen covering him though Larry Legend's deep reserves of will and heart are well chronicled. I'd give Bird the edge in that matchup even though Pip was a stellar defender. Would Rodman and company have slowed down McHale and Parish in the post? No unless the Worm could get into McHale's head. Parish would outplay Longley and Wennington... Heck, the then resurrected Big Redhead would outplay Longley and Wennington if he was a starter. If the 1996 Bulls get out in transition, the slower Celtics would be at a disadvantage. Half court? The mighty Celtic frontcourt would feast where they will pound it inside. Bird can score on the post too along with ruggedly hitting the glass for rebounds. It is THE factor that would decide the series. Offensive and defensive rebounding edge to the Celtics EVEN with the electric Rodman on the floor. You can't run when you constantly have to pull the ball from the basket then have to inbound it. Home floor factor? Not even close. I'd go with Boston Garden with its cramped visitor locker rooms, rats in the showers, the inside heat on the floor, the rabid fans that could make Attila's Huns look like a Sunday church group are intimidating. Not too mention the false fire alarms, crank phone calls during off days between games in that lovely city. Winner of this fantasy series? I call the Celtics in six.

[mrpuente]

well game 7 of the 1984 finals is on espn classic right now:D

[nycelt84]

Just look at the Bulls Centers. '86 Celtics would destroy the Bulls inside.

The Bulls get a lack of criticism for their centers but with those centers they still managed to beat Patrick Ewing, Shaquille O'Neal and Alonzo Mourning. All 3 of those guys are better than Parish and better than Walton in '86. Keep in mind he only averaged 7.6 points per game. The '97 Bulls were just as good as the '96 if not better. The only reason they didn't win 70 was because of Rodman's suspension for kicking the photographer and the '97 team had Brian Williams coming off the bench and Williams was a very capable player.

[1987_Lakers]

The Bulls get a lack of criticism for their centers but with those centers they still managed to beat Patrick Ewing, Shaquille O'Neal and Alonzo Mourning. All 3 of those guys are better than Parish and better than Walton in '86. Keep in mind he only averaged 7.6 points per game. The '97 Bulls were just as good as the '96 if not better. The only reason they didn't win 70 was because of Rodman's suspension for kicking the photographer and the '97 team had Brian Williams coming off the bench and Williams was a very capable player.

The Bulls beat Ewing, O'Neal, and Mourning not the Bulls centers.

The '86 Celtics had the greatest front court in NBA History. They would destroy the Bulls up front. The Celtics are the better team from top to bottom.

"We could not have won 70 games playing against 1980's teams."
- Dennis Rodman

[nycelt84]

The Bulls beat Ewing, O'Neal, and Mourning not the Bulls centers.

The '86 Celtics had the greatest front court in NBA History. They would destroy the Bulls up front. The Celtics are the better team from top to bottom.

"We could not have won 70 games playing against 1980's teams."
- Dennis Rodman

Pippen and Rodman were the starting forwards for those Bulls teams. Bird and McHale are better but there's no way they are destroying Pippen and Rodman. Rodman always did very well against Bird and McHale in the 80's and he was better when he was the Bulls. The Bulls centers held their own against Ewing, O'Neal and Mourning. Robert Parish is not a top 10 center and Bill Walton only averaged 7.6 points per game in '86. Phil Jackson is a better coach than K.C. Jones and Tex Winter is better than Jimmy Rodgers and Chris Ford.

[guy]

The Bulls beat Ewing, O'Neal, and Mourning not the Bulls centers.

The '86 Celtics had the greatest front court in NBA History. They would destroy the Bulls up front. The Celtics are the better team from top to bottom.

"We could not have won 70 games playing against 1980's teams."
- Dennis Rodman

When did Rodman say that?

[1987_Lakers]

Pippen and Rodman were the starting forwards for those Bulls teams. Bird and McHale are better but there's no way they are destroying Pippen and Rodman. Rodman always did very well against Bird and McHale in the 80's and he was better when he was the Bulls. The Bulls centers held their own against Ewing, O'Neal and Mourning. Robert Parish is not a top 10 center and Bill Walton only averaged 7.6 points per game in '86. Phil Jackson is a better coach than K.C. Jones and Tex Winter is better than Jimmy Rodgers and Chris Ford.

Actually Bird was destroying Pippen in the early 90's when he was an old man and had back problems. Nobody stops a prime Larry Bird. And Rodman would not be able to guard McHale in the post. McHale is just to long for him.

Walton averaged 7.6 PPG? Yes, but the guy did everything on the court. He played Defense, blocked shots, and was a great passer. He did win 6th man of the year in 1986. Don't let the stats fool you.

Phil Jackson is a better coach than K.C. Jones but Jackson is also a beter coach than Doc Rivers and how did that turn out?

The Celtics were better than the Bulls at every position except SG.

[nycelt84]

Pippen reached his prime in the mid 90's not the early 90's he was a much better player as the decade went on. Old man with back problems or not Larry Bird was always very good. Rodman did very well against both McHale and Bird both in the '87 and '88 Eastern Conference Finals and that was his rookie year and 2nd year.

[Sir Charles]

Please, Tim Duncan, Dirk Nowitzki, and Amare Stoudemire would all drop 35+ on a prime Barkley, right now. No way in hell he could guard those guys. Everyone wants to live in the past but the guys today are better than any era of NBA players ever and the NBA today is the best it has been since '93. It took a decade to get over expansion and salary caps and all the free agency and stuff but todays NBA is loaded with some of the greatest players to ever play in this league.

Excuse me dude why is it that Barkley and Jordan always complain about how untalented, soft and unwitty minded are the players of today compred to the 90s and 80s?. Jordan has even claimed at an interview that thee "new Stars are un Unwearthy of the Salaries the get. Me Bird, Magic, Charles, Hakeem we Earned What We Got, We Had A Game that Could Back It Up!.

These soft PFs would not have survived an era with handchecking (had to be way more skilled to go by your opponent or post up), real fauls and, no 3 second rule in the paint, where you would get punished with no remorse etc. Barkley has even claimed once that he just likes to watch Shaq and Jordan play, the league is so non-agressive.

Charles obviously has some good compliments about Duncan and Garnett because they remined him of Kevin McHale (his favorite player ever because he had beutiful moves at 6`10 and 7`2 ft! long arm range), which by the way was way harder to Guard than these untalented overrated 6`11 fts I see today.

Its as simple as this dummy

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=barklch01&p2=duncati01

Barkley vs Duncan

Barkley at Ages 34-36 : Past His Game Prime, Past His Physical Prime, Major Back and Knee Inuries, Overweight over 280 lbs: not even close to the Speed, Potence and Leaping Ability he had before)

Duncan at Ages 22-24: Perfectly Healthy in his Physical Prime

Barkley:

MPG: 34.5 (Playing Lesser)

PPG: 19.43
FG%: 47.2%
RPG 13.43
ASPG: 2.71
SPG: 2.1
BPG: 0.57
3-Point FG%: 25%

Duncan:

MPG: 38.5 (Playing Longer)

PPG: 16.0
RPG: 10.0
ASPG: 4.0
SPG: 0.29
BPG: 1.86
3-Point FG%: 0%

:hammerhead: :hammerhead: :hammerhead:

Charles was not Guardable in his Prime. He was TOO QUICK, TOO GOOD OF A BALL HANDLER AND 1 ON 1 DRIVER, TOO STRONG AND COULD LEAP 39 INCHES OF THE GROUND AT OVER 260 LBS. Ask anyone who saw him play from 1985 to 1995. Karl Malone only guarded him in the All Star Matches for Fun in Real Games all the teams had to put in a faster Small Forward that could tire him and was stocky enough to Guard a PF for half of the time and then the other half, put some 6`10, 6`11 Forward-Center type "ala" Ortis Thorpe, Chris Gatling etc to stop him from getting in the paint which he eventually would do: do to his inmense Speed, Strength, Will, Intimidation and 1 on 1 Talent. Add to the fact he could Start Fast Freaks, Fill in Lanes and be A Great Assiter

Charles Barkley = Goat PF :confusedshrug:

[Sir Charles]

Just look at the Bulls Centers. '86 Celtics would destroy the Bulls inside.

These kids don`t understand what a 20 year old to 32 year old "PRIME": PARISH, BIRD AND McHALE would do to the Bulls frontline. Bulls frontline would Get OWNED OFFENSIVELY AND DEFENSIVELY :hammerhead. The only talent tall enough they had in the Frontline was Toni, whom would probaly add some points but COULD NOT GUARDg: McHale or Bird in their Primes). DJ was an underrated Great lead PG with vision (more than Jordan and Pippen), rebounding skills, strong on Defense and was very clutch shoooter. This guy would own Paxon or Ker at the PG spot.

Pippen would definetly have to play PG because the Celtics would have an enormous height and weight advantage in the Front Line with high a Scoring Efficiency up there in the 60% FG. They would also have Rebounding and Blocking Shot Abilities impossed on the Bulls. Pippen would not take part so much in the Offense from the PG Position, leaving Jordan again like in the 80s for excesive work to score. And as I said Toni would be the second leading scorer because Rodman and Grant are UNTALENTED NON SCORING THREATS in the Forwards Positions = So this would leave Bulls with a WEAKER DEFENSE in the Front Line.

You then had Bird and Ainge for clutch shooting and 3s (Siestning and some others with high Efficency Spot Shooting). Walton would somee up for some of the time to play along Parish and McHale in the front line leaving Bird as a SG (Their Famous THE TALL LINE UP). This would add another Rebounder and Shot Blocker but with Great Passing Skills that could dish to Bird/Ainge for the outside shot. Pick and Rolls to create or just combinate with McHale.

These kids are dreaming:hammerhead: :violin:

[1987_Lakers]

so true

[97 bulls]

Listen dude. I just prooved to you that those 3 playes would be unguardable easily:confusedshrug: by any Bulls Frontline of the 90s. And then again. McHale-Parish and Bird would not only Dominate Offensively but McHale and Parish would dominante Longley/Wellington or Grant/Rodman in the boards plus would also block more shots! than these dudes. If the Bulls had Paxon and Kerr for a 3-Pointer then the Celtics had Ainge and Bird hismelf. Plus they had Dennis DJ, a Clutch Shooter, a strong Defensive 6`5 PG that could Rebound, Play D and make others better. Then they had Maxwell on the beanch a talented on one one Smallforward/Powerfoward type with great speed and skill. You also had coming from the bench, the toughness and experience of Walton, whom could pass like a Guard from is Center spot, Play D and Rebound.

The Bulls would have no Chance, they would have to force to put in a Taller Squad. Scottie would be forced to play PG (this would lessen his Scoring Opportunities! and Jordan would have to do more of them). In the Post they would have to play with anotehr PF along Rodman or Grant (forget the SF Spot) and these two would have major troubles scoring do to lack of talent and guarding Bird-McHale-Parish in their PRIME is only a dream. No contest!

:rolleyes:

you didnt prove a damn thing all you did is type it. the bulls dont need any of their centers to out play any of their counterparts. all they had to do is hit the open j if their man helped on a man penetrating. and longley and wennington were excellent jumpshooters. not to mention brian williams with his quickness could score in the post. he averaged 17 and 9 as a clipper playing against some of the best centers ever. the bulls centers were just fine. all that other stuff you typed is nonsense.

[1987_Lakers]

Pippen reached his prime in the mid 90's not the early 90's he was a much better player as the decade went on. Old man with back problems or not Larry Bird was always very good. Rodman did very well against both McHale and Bird both in the '87 and '88 Eastern Conference Finals and that was his rookie year and 2nd year.

1987-88 regular season Larry Bird vs Detriot:

12-4-87. 27 Points. 9 Rebounds. 59 FG%
1-13-88. 28 Points. 7 Rebounds. 13 Assist. 41 FG%
1-29-88 25 Points. 11 Rebounds. 8 Assist. 61 FG%
2-28-88 26 Points. 9 Rebounds. 9 Assist. 46 FG%
4-01-88 32 Points. 11 Rebounds. 5 assist. 50 FG%
4-19-88 22 Points. 5 Rebounds. 9 Assist. 53 FG%

1987-88 regular season Kevin McHale vs Detroit:

12-4-87. 20 Points. 9 Rebounds. 67 FG%
1-13-88. 31 Points. 7 Rebounds. 69 FG%
1-29-88. 20 Points. 3 Rebounds. 52% FG
2-28-88. 33 Points. 11 Rebounds. 63 FG%
4-01-88. 29 Points. 11 Rebounds. 63 FG%
4-19-88. 33 Points. 5 Rebounds. 87 FG%

McHale and Bird dominated Detroit and Rodman. NO QUESTION!!!!

[97 bulls]

Actually Bird was destroying Pippen in the early 90's when he was an old man and had back problems. Nobody stops a prime Larry Bird. And Rodman would not be able to guard McHale in the post. McHale is just to long for him.

Walton averaged 7.6 PPG? Yes, but the guy did everything on the court. He played Defense, blocked shots, and was a great passer. He did win 6th man of the year in 1986. Don't let the stats fool you.

Phil Jackson is a better coach than K.C. Jones but Jackson is also a beter coach than Doc Rivers and how did that turn out?

The Celtics were better than the Bulls at every position except SG.

i really dont ever remember bird an old injured bird owning pippen. PROVE IT
and as far as match ups it depends on how you look at it. as far as scoring the celtics were better in a faster pace league throw about 4 ppgs to the bulls players along with great defense and an extra board or 2 and then compare stats.

[Sir Charles]

1987-88 regular season Larry Bird vs Detriot:

12-4-87. 27 Points. 9 Rebounds. 59 FG%
1-13-88. 28 Points. 7 Rebounds. 13 Assist. 41 FG%
1-29-88 25 Points. 11 Rebounds. 8 Assist. 61 FG%
2-28-88 26 Points. 9 Rebounds. 9 Assist. 46 FG%
4-01-88 32 Points. 11 Rebounds. 5 assist. 50 FG%
4-19-88 22 Points. 5 Rebounds. 9 Assist. 53 FG%

1987-88 regular season Kevin McHale vs Detroit:

12-4-87. 20 Points. 9 Rebounds. 67 FG%
1-13-88. 31 Points. 7 Rebounds. 69 FG%
1-29-88. 20 Points. 3 Rebounds. 52% FG
2-28-88. 33 Points. 11 Rebounds. 63 FG%
4-01-88. 29 Points. 11 Rebounds. 63 FG%
4-19-88. 33 Points. 5 Rebounds. 87 FG%

McHale and Bird dominated Detroit and Rodman. NO QUESTION!!!!


Kevin Mchale`s Post Up Game Scoring 27.7 PPG at a FG % of 66.8%!!! HAHAHAHA :bowdown: :hammerhead: against the Bad Boys PRIME Front Line(same Team that Schooled the Bulls from 1984 to 1990).

Bird as always comming up with Triple Double like Numbers:bowdown:

26.7 PPG at a 51.7% FG%, 8.7 RPG and 8.8 ASPG


And this was Bird and McHale PAST Their Physicall Prime which was 1980 to 1986.

THERE IS NO WAY the BULLS COULD STOP A PRIME 1986 CELTICS:

CENTERS: PARISH-WALTON
FORWARDs: McHALE-BIRD-MAXWELL
GUARDS: BIRD (could play SG)-DJ AND AINGE

Just Imagine if The Celtics would Put in their Big Line UP with:

C: PARISH
C-F: WALTON
PF: McHALE
SG/SF: BIRD
PG: DJ

Only an Idiot Would Think, The Bulls had A Chance!

[1987_Lakers]

i really dont ever remember bird an old injured bird owning pippen. PROVE IT
and as far as match ups it depends on how you look at it. as far as scoring the celtics were better in a faster pace league throw about 4 ppgs to the bulls players along with great defense and an extra board or 2 and then compare stats.


LOL R U KIDDING ME?? The Celtics were the greatest Half Court Team in NBA History. They might have been better in a slow paced league like the mid 90's.

34 YEAR OLD LARRY BIRD WITH NO BACK vs Scottie Pippen


1990-91 regular season:
11-06-90. 24 Points. 11 Rebounds.
11-09-90. 23 Points. 8 Rebounds. 5 assist.
2-26-91. 12 points. 7 rebounds. 5 assist
3-31-91. 34 Points. 15 Rebounds. 8 assist

Can you imagine how bad Bird would of tourched Pippen in his prime?????

[Sir Charles]

i really dont ever remember bird an old injured bird owning pippen. PROVE IT
and as far as match ups it depends on how you look at it. as far as scoring the celtics were better in a faster pace league throw about 4 ppgs to the bulls players along with great defense and an extra board or 2 and then compare stats.

Wrong the Celtics loved the Frontline-Post Up-Slow Game and Ruled The NBA with their Front-Line Witty Game. That is The Way they faced the Lakers (which was the ONLY Succesfull team playing A Fast Tempo Game, that is why they where called ShowTime because people loved their Winning at that Style). The Rest of the NBA Could Not Win With That Style, They Could Only Dream of Playing a Fast Paced Style and Beating Eastern Teams, Only the Lakers Could!

Plus in 1986 Celtics could Play both Styles and they Swept the Rockets with a HAKEEM-SAMSON (FRONTLINE!). The Team that Beat the 1986 Lakers with A PRIME MAGIC, A PRIME WORTHY and KAREEM still Scoring over 22-26 PPG with a FG% of 52-56% plus All The Crew: GREEN, SCOTT, COOPER etc

[97 bulls]

These kids don`t understand what a 20 year old to 32 year old "PRIME": PARISH, BIRD AND McHALE would do to the Bulls frontline. Bulls frontline would Get OWNED OFFENSIVELY AND DEFENSIVELY :hammerhead. The only talent tall enough they had in the Frontline was Toni, whom would probaly add some points but COULD NOT GUARDg: McHale or Bird in their Primes). DJ was an underrated Great lead PG with vision (more than Jordan and Pippen), rebounding skills, strong on Defense and was very clutch shoooter. This guy would own Paxon or Ker at the PG spot.

Pippen would definetly have to play PG because the Celtics would have an enormous height and weight advantage in the Front Line with high a Scoring Efficiency up there in the 60% FG. They would also have Rebounding and Blocking Shot Abilities impossed on the Bulls. Pippen would not take part so much in the Offense from the PG Position, leaving Jordan again like in the 80s for excesive work to score. And as I said Toni would be the second leading scorer because Rodman and Grant are UNTALENTED NON SCORING THREATS in the Forwards Positions = So this would leave Bulls with a WEAKER DEFENSE in the Front Line.

You then had Bird and Ainge for clutch shooting and 3s (Siestning and some others with high Efficency Spot Shooting). Walton would somee up for some of the time to play along Parish and McHale in the front line leaving Bird as a SG (Their Famous THE TALL LINE UP). This would add another Rebounder and Shot Blocker but with Great Passing Skills that could dish to Bird/Ainge for the outside shot. Pick and Rolls to create or just combinate with McHale.

These kids are dreaming:hammerhead: :violin:

first of all im 34 and remember the 80s.you on the other hand on several occasions have referred to dennis johnon as the pg. let me help you ainge was the pg dj was the sg. the bulls also had a big line up. their staring guards were 6'6 taller than ainge and johnson not to mention harper was a pretty good basketball player himself.

second you you and 87 lakers obviously dont know the Xs and Os of basketball or never played it, and if you did you probably arent any good because you would know that you had to keep a man on rodman because of his offensive rebounding capability. not to mention by ron harpers own addmitsion he could still have been a 20ppg scorer but played his role on the bulls team defending the other teams pg and he did a hell of a job defending players like payton, stockton, and penny hardaway.i dont see him having a problem with ainge. not to mention the bulls could go even bigger if they opted to play kukoc at sf move pippen to pg and put williams at center. and why would pippen not be able to score from the pg position?

pippen 6'7 ainge 6'5
jordan 6'6 johnson 6'5
kukoc 6'11 bird 6'8
rodman 6'8 mchale 6'10
williams 6'11 parrish 7'0

[1987_Lakers]

The 1996 Bulls are more athletic, better defensively on the perimeter with Jordan, Harper, Pippen . Rodman could provide more than capable interior defense and chip in points too. The willowy Kukoc and Kerr both can knock down open Js. The 1986 Celtics with Bird at his peak then are the epitome of toughness. McHale, Parish with a healthy Bill Walton who won Sixth Man of The Year that season as a triumvirate is an overwhelming front line. Dennis Johnson was still an elite defender with the streaky Ainge as his running mate. Sichting and Wedman are as reliable as the Bulls' trio of ivory snipers though Wedman IMO is much better than Buechler any day. The series would probably be the classic OK Corral shootout between Jordan and Bird. Jordan could score on DJ though he will have to work for them to some degree. Same goes with Bird with Pippen covering him though Larry Legend's deep reserves of will and heart are well chronicled. I'd give Bird the edge in that matchup even though Pip was a stellar defender. Would Rodman and company have slowed down McHale and Parish in the post? No unless the Worm could get into McHale's head. Parish would outplay Longley and Wennington... Heck, the then resurrected Big Redhead would outplay Longley and Wennington if he was a starter. If the 1996 Bulls get out in transition, the slower Celtics would be at a disadvantage. Half court? The mighty Celtic frontcourt would feast where they will pound it inside. Bird can score on the post too along with ruggedly hitting the glass for rebounds. It is THE factor that would decide the series. Offensive and defensive rebounding edge to the Celtics EVEN with the electric Rodman on the floor. You can't run when you constantly have to pull the ball from the basket then have to inbound it. Home floor factor? Not even close. I'd go with Boston Garden with its cramped visitor locker rooms, rats in the showers, the inside heat on the floor, the rabid fans that could make Attila's Huns look like a Sunday church group are intimidating. Not too mention the false fire alarms, crank phone calls during off days between games in that lovely city. Winner of this fantasy series? I call the Celtics in six.

..

[97 bulls]

Wrong the Celtics loved the Frontline-Post Up-Slow Game and Ruled The NBA with their Front-Line Witty Game. That is The Way they faced the Lakers (which was the ONLY Succesfull team playing A Fast Tempo Game, that is why they where called ShowTime because people loved their Winning at that Style). The Rest of the NBA Could Not Win With That Style, They Could Only Dream of Playing a Fast Paced Style and Beating Eastern Teams, Only the Lakers Could!

Plus in 1986 Celtics could Play both Styles and they Swept the Rockets with a HAKEEM-SAMSON (FRONTLINE!). The Team that Beat the 1986 Lakers with A PRIME MAGIC, A PRIME WORTHY and KAREEM still Scoring over 22-26 PPG with a FG% of 52-56% plus All The Crew: GREEN, SCOTT, COOPER etc

all still in a faster paced league

[1987_Lakers]

all still in a faster paced league

And if the '86 Celtics played in the mid 90's they would have won even more games because of...

A. Diluted NBA. weaker competition.

B. The Celtics were the greatest Half Court team in NBA history and with a slower paced mid 90's NBA they would have used it to their advantage.

[97 bulls]

And if the '86 Celtics played in the mid 90's they would have won even more games because of...

A. Diluted NBA. weaker competition.

B. The Celtics were the greatest Half Court team in NBA history and with a slower paced mid 90's NBA they would have used it to their advantage.

does someone pay you to say that? ive already dispelled the notion that the league wasnt waterd down. but, like i said you believe what you want to believe. not the truth. and the bulls were just as good a half court team if not better.

[1987_Lakers]

does someone pay you to say that? ive already dispelled the notion that the league wasnt waterd down. but, like i said you believe what you want to believe. not the truth. and the bulls were just as good a half court team if not better.

The NBA was watered down in 1996 no question. And the Celtics were a better Half Court team than the Bulls no question.

[Sir Charles]

first of all im 34 and remember the 80s.you on the other hand on several occasions have referred to dennis johnon as the pg. let me help you ainge was the pg dj was the sg. the bulls also had a big line up. their staring guards were 6'6 taller than ainge and johnson not to mention harper was a pretty good basketball player himself.

second you you and 87 lakers obviously dont know the Xs and Os of basketball or never played it, and if you did you probably arent any good because you would know that you had to keep a man on rodman because of his offensive rebounding capability. not to mention by ron harpers own addmitsion he could still have been a 20ppg scorer but played his role on the bulls team defending the other teams pg and he did a hell of a job defending players like payton, stockton, and penny hardaway.i dont see him having a problem with ainge. not to mention the bulls could go even bigger if they opted to play kukoc at sf move pippen to pg and put williams at center. and why would pippen not be able to score from the pg position?

pippen 6'7 ainge 6'5
jordan 6'6 johnson 6'5
kukoc 6'11 bird 6'8
rodman 6'8 mchale 6'10
williams 6'11 parrish 7'0

Let me give notice to you that Celtics played with a Combo Guard-Line Up

Ainge was a Better Shooter than DJ but Could Pass with PG Abbilities too
DJ was a Pure PG, Smarter, Defensive Player and was a Clutch Shooter. Could Rebound Asoume at 6`5 too.

Celtics would use their Big Line Up:) to Kill the Bulls, Adding in Walton along Parish and McHale in the Frontline. So you have the following:

In their Prime:

C: PARISH (17-20 ppg, 55-60%FG, 9-11 RPG) v.s C: WILLIAMS (LONGLEY,WELL)

CHIEF Wins Easy!:rolleyes:

C-F: WALTON (Bulls Would have to Put in Another Center to Hold him from Rebounding and Scoring, And he Could Also Pass)

Walton would Win That Roll Player! Plus Could Rebound, Block Shots, Had Clutch Game and from that Spot Could CREATE ASSITS :)

PF: McHALE 6`10 (18-26 PPG, 60.4%Fg%, 8-9 RPG) vs PF: RODMAN/GRANT

McHale Not Only Wins, Schools!!!. Id Suggest The Bulls Put in CENTER to Guard McHales 6`10 ft Post Play and his 7`2ft Arm Lenght Post :rolleyes:

SG: BIRD 6`9 ft (3-Point Specialist, 29 PPG, 10 RPG, 6-8 ASPG) vs KUKOC/PIPPEN

Bird already Schooled Pippen a Better Defender than Kukoc at Age 33-35:rolleyes: PAST HIS PHYSICAL PIME and AFTER HIS BACK INJURY. Kukoc would Guard him Well in the Post due to Height but he Would Not Outrebound Him, Would Not Stop him from Scoring from A Far and Would Definetly Not Sop him from Getting PG ASSIT TYPE NUMBERS and Making His Team Better. Also If You have a 1979 to 1986 Bird. They you had a Much Faster Bird:oldlol:

PG: DJ (D Stopper, Assiter, Rebounder, Clutch Shooter) vs Jordan (SG/PG)

This is the only SPOT where the Bulls would win. But Jordan would be Slowed Down but DJs Witty Game and would have to Work if DJ Posted Him Up. DJ had a Fat Ass and was Great Rebounder for 6`5 ft. Jordan would win the 1 on 1 Game Obviously but he would Suffer in the Slow Front-Court Game with DJ. Then the Celtics would just Bring in DANNY AINGE to Make Jordan Run More and Danny would Get his Shots Off due to the Pick and Rolls designed by PARSIH, WALTON, McHALE and BIRD.

So here it is. If THE CELTICS BRING IN THEIR "TALL TEAM" (As They Did v.s The 1986 Rockets which had HAKEEM and SAMSON: Whom Beat a PRIME MAGIC, WORTHY, SCOTT, GREEN and KAREEM still scoring 23-26 PPG at a 53 TO 56% FG)...HOW CAN THE BULLS WIN? :rolleyes: :hammerhead:

CELTICS = DOMINATE 4 SPOTS

BULLS= DOMINATE 1 SPOT

1986 CELTICS and Their BIG LINE UP that Could Play BOTH FAST AND SLOW TEMPO would OWN the 1996 BULLS...EASY:confusedshrug:

[1987_Lakers]

I don't think the NBA was watered down in quality players (even though the greatest players played in the mid 80's. hehe) but it was definitely watered down quality teams. In just 8 years the NBA added 6 NBA Teams. It was really the Bulls vs any1 else in that era. Just look at the '97 and '98 Jazz. You had Stockton and Malone but the 3rd best player on that team was Jeff Hornacek. And you had Greg Ostertag and Bryon Russell in the starting line up. That team would not get you in the NBA finals in the mid 80's. No Way!

Like i said before...

Better Teams: 80's > 90's
Better Players: 80's > 90's
Better Rivalries: 80's > 90's

80's was the greatest decade in NBA History nobody can argue!!!

[Sir Charles]

Let me give notice to you that Celtics played with a Combo Guard-Line Up

Ainge was a Better Shooter than DJ but Could Pass with PG Abbilities too
DJ was a Pure PG, Smarter, Defensive Player and was a Clutch Shooter. Could Rebound Asoume at 6`5 too.

Celtics would use their Big Line Up:) to Kill the Bulls, Adding in Walton along Parish and McHale in the Frontline. So you have the following:

In their Prime:

C: PARISH (17-20 ppg, 55-60%FG, 9-11 RPG) v.s C: WILLIAMS (LONGLEY,WELL)

CHIEF Wins Easy!:rolleyes:

C-F: WALTON (Bulls Would have to Put in Another Center to Hold him from Rebounding and Scoring, And he Could Also Pass)

Walton would Win That Roll Player! Plus Could Rebound, Block Shots, Had Clutch Game and from that Spot Could CREATE ASSITS :)

PF: McHALE 6`10 (18-26 PPG, 60.4%Fg%, 8-9 RPG) vs PF: RODMAN/GRANT

McHale Not Only Wins, Schools!!!. Id Suggest The Bulls Put in CENTER to Guard McHales 6`10 ft Post Play and his 7`2f t Arm Lenght :rolleyes:

SG: BIRD 6`9 ft (3-Point Specialist, 29 PPG, 10 RPG, 6-8 ASPG) vs KUKOC/PIPPEN

Bird (could play both SG/SF) already Schooled Pippen a "Better Defender" than Kukoc at Age 33-35:rolleyes: PAST HIS PHYSICAL PIME and AFTER HIS BACK INJURY. Kukoc would Guard him Well in the Post due to Height but he Would Not Outrebound Him, Would Not Stop him from Scoring from A Far and Would Definetly Not Sop him from Getting PG ASSIT TYPE NUMBERS and Making His Team Better. Also If You have a 1979 to 1986 Bird: Then you had a Much Faster Bird with a Back :oldlol:

PG: DJ (Defensive Player, a G Stopper, Assiter, Rebounder, Clutch Shooter) vs Jordan (SG/PG)

This is the only SPOT where the Bulls would win. But Jordan would be Slowed Down but DJs Witty Game and would have to Work if DJ Posted Him Up. DJ had a Fat Ass and was Great Rebounder for 6`5 ft. Jordan would win the 1 on 1 Game Obviously but he would Suffer in the Slow Front-Court Game with DJ. Then the Celtics would just Bring in DANNY AINGE to Make Jordan Run More and Danny would Get his Shots Off due to the Pick and Rolls designed by PARSIH, WALTON, McHALE and BIRD.

So here it is:

If THE CELTICS BRING IN THEIR "TALL TEAM". As They Did v.s The 1986 Rockets which had HAKEEM and SAMSON = Same Team that Beat a PRIME MAGIC, WORTHY, SCOTT, GREEN and also KAREEM still scoring 23-26 PPG at a 53 TO 56% FG)...

HOW CAN THE BULLS WIN? :rolleyes: :hammerhead:

CELTICS = DOMINATE 4 SPOTS

BULLS= DOMINATE 1 SPOT

1986 CELTICS and Their BIG LINE UP that Could Play BOTH FAST AND SLOW TEMPO would OWN the 1996 BULLS...EASY:confusedshrug:


:violin:

[Sir Charles]

And if the '86 Celtics played in the mid 90's they would have won even more games because of...

A. Diluted NBA. weaker competition.

B. The Celtics were the greatest Half Court team in NBA history and with a slower paced mid 90's NBA they would have used it to their advantage.

Amen :violin:

Just Imagine their Big Line Up like Agains the Rockets in 1986 with

McHale-Parish and Walton. They would Destroyed the Bulls frontline!

Plus you also had Bird that could Play SG or SF and Still Get Triple Doubles and high Scoring Games in his Prime and DJ/Ainge Trading Spots throught the game (to tire off Jordan) and Maxwell coming in to damage offensively from the SG/SF spots too

No Question. 1986 Celtics Would Own the 1996 Bulls :rockon:

[72-10]

1980s = Greatest Era in NBA History. Period. End of Discussion:rockon: :confusedshrug:[/B]

"The 80s" is not an era, so you should stop pretending like it was. It's not like the league magically changed when the calendar hit 1980 or 1990. An "era" has to have something distinct and definitive about it, otherwise you cannot define it as an era. The greatest era could be contended as 1985-1993.

[1987_Lakers]

"The 80s" is not an era, so you should stop pretending like it was. It's not like the league magically changed when the calendar hit 1980 or 1990. An "era" has to have something distinct and definitive about it, otherwise you cannot define it as an era. The greatest era could be contended as 1985-1993.

Well it's definitely the greatest DECADE.:rockon:

[Sir Charles]

I call the Celtics in six.

If that :)

[72-10]

No Question. 1986 Celtics Would Own the 1996 Bulls :rockon: [/B]

No, they would not. They would have difficulty entering the ball into the post since the Bulls had indisputedly the best perimeter defense in NBA history. They also had most probably the best full court pressing defense in NBA history. How the hell does 86 Celtics vs. 96 Bulls have relevance to this thread?

[72-10]

Well it's definitely the greatest DECADE.:rockon:

Most probably, but that was established on about the 3rd page of this thread. Why do you insist on continually rambling on about it?

[1987_Lakers]

I call the Celtics in six.

If that :)

:)

[Sir Charles]

Well it's definitely the greatest DECADE.:rockon:

1980s = The Best Decade in BASKETBAL, MUSIC (ROCK, POP, HAD ROCK, METAL, PROG ROCK edgin with the 70s, SOUL AFRICAN AMERICAN MUSIC, COUNTRY ROCK), CARS, CLOTHES, MOVIES...:rockon:

1982 = BEST SOCCER WORLD CUP EVER too:applause:

[72-10]

1980s was more like the worst decade in the history of recorded music, not even close to the best. Only the 00s come close to being as poor and lacking in consistent and overall quality.

[Sir Charles]

1980s was more like the worst decade in the history of recorded music, not even close to the best. Only the 00s come close to being as poor and lacking in consistent and overall quality.

Ok Compare AOR SINGERS and Legendary Compositions to Rock Pop of the 90s

Compare HARDROCK-METAL GUITARRIST AND SINGERS AND LEGENDARY BANDS to the 90s and 2000s Alternative Rock, Grunge, Rap Metal ****

Compare Soul/Hi Hop African American Artistsa like Turner, Lionel Ritchie, Quincy Jones = These ****ers Can Sing not the **** 90s and 200s, Rap Baggy Pant Bull****.

Compare DISCO POP 80s to Disco Pop 90s

Compare NEWAVE ROCK of the 80s to 90s

Compare Action-Teen-Comedy-Terror-Drama MOVIES of the 80s to the 90s

No Contest Man. You Should be Shot For Saying 90s Music and 2000s is better than 1980s Music:rolleyes:

[72-10]

Disco pop? :oldlol: LMAO that's like a cultural fad, not a musical genre. Disco does not exist in the 90s.

All forms of rock 'n' roll from the 90s were superior to those from the 80s.

The 1980s was largely devoid of creativity and originality. Pretty much the only thing creative to come from the 80s was hip-hop, which was more popular in the 90s.

The 60s and 70s crush the 80s in music, which is not even up for debate.

[97 bulls]

LOL R U KIDDING ME?? The Celtics were the greatest Half Court Team in NBA History. They might have been better in a slow paced league like the mid 90's.

34 YEAR OLD LARRY BIRD WITH NO BACK vs Scottie Pippen


1990-91 regular season:
11-06-90. 24 Points. 11 Rebounds.
11-09-90. 23 Points. 8 Rebounds. 5 assist.
2-26-91. 12 points. 7 rebounds. 5 assist
3-31-91. 34 Points. 15 Rebounds. 8 assist

Can you imagine how bad Bird would of tourched Pippen in his prime?????
i tallied their stats and this is what i came up with head to head:

bird pippen
pts 24 22
rbd 8 7
ast 6 7
stl 1 3
blk 0 1

and note that on average bird took more shots than pippen, in that 34 pt game you stated, he took 36 shots. (his back wasnt hurting him that night) and shot about 41% and averaged 5 tos a game. credit pippens defense. now while bird was about 33 and past his prime, pippen was yet in his prime which to me started in 92-98. facts baby facts:)

[Sir Charles]

:confusedshrug: Disco pop? :oldlol: LMAO that's like a cultural fad, not a musical genre. Disco does not exist in the 90s.

Ofcourse because 90s Sucked. No Elegant Singers, No Great Ballads. No Great Hits. No Emotion. Even the Disco was more modern sounding and Still More Emotional than the Techno **** of the 90s (and even Tecnho was an 80s Undeground Invention and Rap itself too)

All forms of rock 'n' roll from the 90s were superior to those from the 80s.

Are you insane or dumb?:oldlol:

Compare: JUDAS PRIEST, IRON MAIDEN, SAXON, RAINBOW, DIO, SABBATH, ACCEPT, DOKKEN, WHITESANKE, SCORPIONS, TNT, EUROPE, METALLICA, MEGADETH, OVERKILL, ANTHRAX, SLAYER, QUEENSRYCHE, SAVATAGE, MSG, MOTLEY CREW, KISS, WASP, TYGERS OF PANG TANG, GRIM REAPER, etc

to: PEARLY JAMMY, LIMPBISKIT (****SKIT), NIRVANA, MARYLIN MANSON, RAP METAL hahahahaah

:hammerhead:

The 1980s was largely devoid of creativity and originality. Pretty much the only thing creative to come from the 80s was hip-hop, which was more popular in the 90s.

CREATIVITY ACTUALLY EXISTED IN THE 80s :rolleyes: :confusedshrug: . MORE INNOVATION, SUPERIOR SINGERS, SUPERIOR GUITARRITS, SUPERIOR POP ROCK HITS. WAY MORE MODERN SOUNDING GUITARRS, SINGERS, BASS PLAYERS, SYNTHS etc.

Compare AOR ROCK POP: FORIGNER, BOSTON, CHICAGO, SURVIVOR, HEART, ASIA, BALLARD, ROXXETE, BON JOVI etc to the Pop Ballad Hits of 90s and 2000s. Which had More Elegance, Superior Emotion, Ballads and Music Quality?

:hammerhead:

The 60s and 70s crush the 80s in music, which is not even up for debate

60s = WAY INFERIOR

70s = MORE INNOVATIVE AND THE ROOT OF THE 80s is the 70s. Such as in Basketball Great 70s Players Played Along the Great Players of the 80s and in the 1990s ONLY 80s Players Dominated:). 1980s Respected the 1970s and Followed with the Same Style but More Modern and Yes MORE EMOTIONAL. MORE SOUL CRUNCHING because it was obviously the last Decade with Human Sensitivity :rolleyes:

1980s SCHOOLS even in MUSIC :confusedshrug:

[Sir Charles]

i tallied their stats and this is what i came up with head to head:

bird pippen
pts 24 22
rbd 8 7
ast 6 7
stl 1 3
blk 0 1

and note that on average bird took more shots than pippen, in that 34 pt game you stated, he took 36 shots. (his back wasnt hurting him that night) and shot about 41% and averaged 5 tos a game. credit pippens defense. now while bird was about 33 and past his prime, pippen was yet in his prime which to me started in 92-98. facts baby facts:)

This was Bird at 33 years of age Imagine Bird at ages 23 to 30?:confusedshrug:

[nycelt84]

Wrong the Celtics loved the Frontline-Post Up-Slow Game and Ruled The NBA with their Front-Line Witty Game. That is The Way they faced the Lakers (which was the ONLY Succesfull team playing A Fast Tempo Game, that is why they where called ShowTime because people loved their Winning at that Style). The Rest of the NBA Could Not Win With That Style, They Could Only Dream of Playing a Fast Paced Style and Beating Eastern Teams, Only the Lakers Could!

Plus in 1986 Celtics could Play both Styles and they Swept the Rockets with a HAKEEM-SAMSON (FRONTLINE!). The Team that Beat the 1986 Lakers with A PRIME MAGIC, A PRIME WORTHY and KAREEM still Scoring over 22-26 PPG with a FG% of 52-56% plus All The Crew: GREEN, SCOTT, COOPER etc

What the hell are you talking about? 1st of all Cedric Maxwell never played with Bill Walton and 2nd The Rockets series went to 6 games hardly a sweep and that's a Rockets team playing without their starting point guard John Lucas. The '88 Pistons beat the Celtics in 6 and when you watch that series they should have swept the Celtics. And in 1987 if Adrian Dantley doesn't get hurt in Game 7 the Celtics don't win.

[nycelt84]

This was Bird at 33 years of age Imagine Bird at ages 23 to 30?:confusedshrug:

And that was Pippen at age 25 imagine Pippen at age 29-31 when he became the best SF in the league?:confusedshrug:

[72-10]

It's rather clear that you don't know much about music, Sir Charles. I'm not going into a debate about it on a basketball discussion board. The 1960s and 1970s are so far ahead of all other decades in terms of music, it's laughable.

[Sir Charles]

What the hell are you talking about? 1st of all Cedric Maxwell never played with Bill Walton and 2nd The Rockets series went to 6 games hardly a sweep and that's a Rockets team playing without their starting point guard John Lucas. The '88 Pistons beat the Celtics in 6 and when you watch that series they should have swept the Celtics. And in 1987 if Adrian Dantley doesn't get hurt in Game 7 the Celtics don't win.

True messed up there but without him the Celtics would have owned the Bulls in no more than 6 Games anyhow because they also had Great Roll Players that could Defend and SHOOT. I pointed out the reasons why the Bulls could only dominate in 1 Spot (Jordan vs DJ/Ainge) if the Celtics Put in Their BIG LINEUPE as they did with The Rockets. Bulls would be forced to put in a Much Bigger Line Up to Hold the Big Three plus Walton fron Scoring at very high FG%, Defending, Rebounding and Blocking Shots and bench Kerr/Paxon and put Scottie or Harper as PG. Scottie would not be a scoring threat from that position and if he Played Forward then you would have to take away either Grant or Rodman, which would not be enough to Contend a Big Line and even more dangerous cost.

C: PARISH
C-F: WALTON
PF: McHALE
SG/SF: BIRD
PG/SG: AINGE or DJ

Thats what they did in many Games and Agains the 1986 Rockets.

True it was No Sweap but it was a Clear Victory and the Rockets had 6`11 ft HAKEEM THE DREAM and 7`4 ft RALPH SAMSON (Whom was Faster and A Better Ball Handler than All of the Centers and 95% of the PFs). That same Team Beat the 1986 Lakes with a PRIME MAGIC, PRIME WORTHY, PRIME GREEN, PRIME SCOTT, PRIME COOPER and KAREEM still Scoring between 23 and 26 ppg and at an efficiency of 53 to 56.4 FG%.

If the Rockets could not Dominate the Paint with RALPH SAMSON AND HAKEEM what makes you think the Bulls would even compete with Williams-Wellington-Longely-Rodman againts the Celtics PARISH-WALTON-McHALE-BIRD?

:hammerhead:

[Sir Charles]

And that was Pippen at age 25 imagine Pippen at age 29-31 when he became the best SF in the league?:confusedshrug:

Pippens Greatest Season was 1993-94 when Jordan Left. No doubt about IT but that season cannot be compared to Birds Greatest Seasons 83-84, 84-85, 85-86

BIRd`s Career Average is Pretty Much Superior to Scottie`s Greatest Season.

BIRD: CARRER AVERAGES

23/24 PPG (49.7% FG), 10 RPG, 6.3/6.5 ASPG, 1.7 SPG :violin:

PIPPEN: 1993-94 SEASON

20. 7 PPG (49.1% FG), 8.2 RPG, 5.3 ASPG, 2.8 SPG :hammerhead:

:confusedshrug:

[1987_Lakers]

And that was Pippen at age 25 imagine Pippen at age 29-31 when he became the best SF in the league?:confusedshrug:

The gap between how good Bird was in '86 to '91 is pretty big.

The gap between how good Pippen was in '91 to '96-'97 isn't.

There are alot of people out there including me who would take Pippen during the Bulls first 3-peat over Pippen during the Bulls 2nd 3 Peat.

[nycelt84]

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.

[97 bulls]

Pippens Greatest Season was 1993-94 when Jordan Left. No doubt about IT but that season cannot be compared to Birds Greatest Seasons 83-84, 84-85, 85-86

BIRd`s Career Average is Pretty Much Superior to Scottie`s Greatest Season.

BIRD: CARRER AVERAGES

23/24 PPG (49.7% FG), 10 RPG, 6.3/6.5 ASPG, 1.7 SPG :violin:

PIPPEN: 1993-94 SEASON

20. 7 PPG (49.1% FG), 8.2 RPG, 5.3 ASPG, 2.8 SPG :hammerhead:

:confusedshrug:

this is just as stupid as sayin that the bulls would beat the celtics because they won 72 games and the celtics only won 65. ITS DIFFERENT ERAS. LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE AND HOW THINGS ARE RELATIVELY. BIRD PUT UP THOSE AVERAGES NOT ONLY BECAUSE HE WAS GREAT BUT ALSO BECAUSE OF THE PACE. you are statisticly comparing 1 guy who was the number 1 option to a guy that was the number 2 option. even jordan suffered statisticly in the 90s due to pace.

[1987_Lakers]

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.

If Pippen guards DJ. Then that leaves MJ on Bird. And there is no way MJ is stopping Bird. Bird would post him up all day. Overall I always felt '86 Bird was better than '96 Jordan.

[1987_Lakers]

this is just as stupid as sayin that the bulls would beat the celtics because they won 72 games and the celtics only won 65. ITS DIFFERENT ERAS. LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE AND HOW THINGS ARE RELATIVELY. BIRD PUT UP THOSE AVERAGES NOT ONLY BECAUSE HE WAS GREAT BUT ALSO BECAUSE OF THE PACE. you are statisticly comparing 1 guy who was the number 1 option to a guy that was the number 2 option. even jordan suffered statisticly in the 90s due to pace.

Actually it was 67 games.

It was different eras but the Celtics played in a BETTER ERA!!!

[97 bulls]

The gap between how good Bird was in '86 to '91 is pretty big.

The gap between how good Pippen was in '91 to '96-'97 isn't.

There are alot of people out there including me who would take Pippen during the Bulls first 3-peat over Pippen during the Bulls 2nd 3 Peat.

i for one feel that pippen became even better and got more respect after what he did in 94. i really feel that he should have been the mvp. and that in this day and age he would. look at nash. and while i beleive that bird was better than pippen i dont believe its by that much and i showed you that useing your picked years. bird was older and pippen was too young. factor in the defensive side of the ball and id give a slight edge to pippen even as jordans second fiddle over bird as the 1st option.

[nycelt84]

If Pippen guards DJ. Then that leaves MJ on Bird. And there is no way MJ is stopping Bird. Bird would post him up all day. Overall I always felt '86 Bird was better than '96 Jordan.

Michael was a top 5 defensive player so he would have held his own and there was no way anyone on the Celtics were stopping him either. I highly disagree '86 Bird was better than '96 Jordan.

[1987_Lakers]

i for one feel that pippen became even better and got more respect after what he did in 94. i really feel that he should have been the mvp. and that in this day and age he would. look at nash. and while i beleive that bird was better than pippen i dont believe its by that much and i showed you that useing your picked years. bird was older and pippen was too young. factor in the defensive side of the ball and id give a slight edge to pippen even as jordans second fiddle over bird as the 1st option.

Pippen was young but he was still an All Defensive Team player. And Bird was in his mid 30's with a bad back.

[97 bulls]

Actually it was 67 games.

It was different eras but the Celtics played in a BETTER ERA!!!

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.

[1987_Lakers]

Michael was a top 5 defensive player so he would have held his own and there was no way anyone on the Celtics were stopping him either. I highly disagree '86 Bird was better than '96 Jordan.

MJ always had trouble playing against bigger players. In the '91 Finals he guarded Magic and he just couldn't contain him.

You may disagree with the '86 Bird > '96 Jordan but it's true.

[97 bulls]

Pippen was young but he was still an All Defensive Team player. And Bird was in his mid 30's with a bad back.

and it shows by pip forcing him to turn the ball over an average of 5 times

[nycelt84]

MJ always had trouble playing against bigger players. In the '91 Finals he guarded Magic and he just couldn't contain him.

You may disagree with the '86 Bird > '96 Jordan but it's true.

What makes it true that's just a matter of personal opinion nor do the numbers clearly show Bird was better. And nobody ever contained Magic.

[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.

What? The Celtics destroyed everyone that season. Please do some research.

[1987_Lakers]

What makes it true that's just a matter of personal opinion nor do the numbers clearly show Bird was better. And nobody ever contained Magic.

And nobody ever contained Bird.

[97 bulls]

MJ always had trouble playing against bigger players. In the '91 Finals he guarded Magic and he just couldn't contain him.

You may disagree with the '86 Bird > '96 Jordan but it's true.

he didnt have trouble. and he wouldnt have to gurd magic pip or harper could.

[1987_Lakers]

and it shows by pip forcing him to turn the ball over an average of 5 times

That would not have happened if that was '86 Bird.

[97 bulls]

What? The Celtics destroyed everyone that season. Please do some research.

are we talking bout a season or that whole era? cuz im talking about the era

[1987_Lakers]

he didnt have trouble. and he wouldnt have to gurd magic pip or harper could.

Yes he did. MJ got into early foul trouble in Games 1 and 2 because he just coudn't handle Magic.

[97 bulls]

That would not have happened if that was '86 Bird.

hey, you tried to compare a 33 year old bird to pip not me

[97 bulls]

are we talking bout a season or that whole era? cuz im talking about the era
well, either way the lakers lost 4-1 and it should have been a sweep even magic said that they couldnt get mad because they were "getting a good but kicking"

[1987_Lakers]

are we talking bout a season or that whole era? cuz im talking about the era

Oh ok. If you are talking about an era than the Celtics didn't dominate because there was actually QUALITY TEAMS in the 80's. Magic's lakers, Isiah's Pistons, and Julius Erving's Sixers. That just tells you how much better teams were in the 80's.

There were 4 All Time great Teams in the 80's. In the 90's on the other hand you only had the Bulls.

[1987_Lakers]

well, either way the lakers lost 4-1 and it should have been a sweep even magic said that they couldnt get mad because they were "getting a good but kicking"

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.

[97 bulls]

Oh ok. If you are talking about an era than the Celtics didn't dominate because there was actually QUALITY TEAMS in the 80's. Magic's lakers, Isiah's Pistons, and Julius Erving's Sixers. That just tells you how much better teams were in the 80's.

There were 4 All Time great Teams in the 80's. In the 90's on the other hand you only had the Bulls.

and are you going to answer my question? if the bulls lost to the knicks or jazz once would that make them more dominating?

[1987_Lakers]

and are you going to answer my question? if the bulls lost to the knicks or jazz once would that make them more dominating?

The Bulls actually lost to the Knicks in '94.

[72-10]

I think the 96 Bulls would beat the 86 Celtics, but it would probably take 7 games. The Bulls would have homecourt advantage. I think those Bulls teams could beat any team you challenge against them, but they would struggle with certain teams more than others. The 86 Celtics are one of the teams they'd struggle the most to beat. Other than that I don't see what the hell the point is to what anyone says in this stupid thread.:rolleyes:

[1987_Lakers]

I think the 96 Bulls would beat the 86 Celtics, but it would probably take 7 games. The Bulls would have homecourt advantage. I think those Bulls teams could beat any team you challenge against them, but they would struggle with certain teams more than others. The 86 Celtics are one of the teams they'd struggle the most to beat. Other than that I don't see what the hell the point is to what anyone says in this stupid thread.:rolleyes:

I disagree.

The Celtics were better than the Bulls in all positions except SG. You Bulls fans are just to blind to admit it.

[nycelt84]

Isiah's Pistons weren't a championship caliber team until '87 and they made the change from an offensive team to a defensive team. That was the year they drafted Rodman and Salley and traded Tripucka for Dantley.

[72-10]

I disagree.

The Celtics were better than the Bulls in all positions except SG. You Bulls fans are just to blind to admit it.

Who the hell cares about positions? The Bulls were the better TEAM.

[1987_Lakers]

Isiah's Pistons weren't a championship caliber team until '87 and they made the change from an offensive team to a defensive team. That was the year they drafted Rodman and Salley and traded Tripucka for Dantley.

Yes, thats right. They lost to the Celtics in '87 and to the Lakers in '88.

[1987_Lakers]

Who the hell cares about positions? The Bulls were the better TEAM.

The Celtics were the better TEAM

[72-10]

The Celtics were the better TEAM

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.