Printable View
[B]Bulls First 3 Peat[/B] '91-'93
C - Bill Cartwright
PF - Horace Grant
SF - Scottie Pippen
SG - Michael Jordan
PG - John Paxson
BENCH
B.J. Armstrong
Stacey King
Will Perdue
[B]Bulls Second 3 Peat[/B]: '96-'98
C - Luc Longley
PF - Dennis Rodman
SF - Scottie Pippen
SG - Michael Jordan
PG - Ron Harper
BENCH
Toni Kukoc
Steve Kerr
Bill Wennington
I get alot of mixed answers when I ask this question. Who would win in a 7 game series?
1st three peat team would win. Put the best of each three-peat (1992 and 1996) against each other and I think 1992 takes it in 6, possibly 7.
Depends. Of course the 2nd 3 peat team had deeper roster and Pippen was improved player even more.
I like to say the '96 or '97 team because I don't think full court zone press would be as effective against big guards like Harp & MJ. Also point forwards like Pip & Kukoc who could bring the ball up & handle it well. As great and physically strong Horace was, he was not Dennis Rodman, period. And as great as MJ was the first 3 peat, I think the MJ/Pip duo was that much better in the late 90s. But it would definitely be interesting match. :applause:
I'd go with 2nd
1st 3 peat because Jordan and Pippen were much better. But the 2nd 3 peat had a better surrounding cast.
Man, now that's a pretty tough question right there. I personally I would pick the first 3 Peat.
I'll start with the bench first because I think with Kukoc alone, the late '90s bench was much better than the first 3 peat.
Then with the starting lineup I think that Cartwright and Longley are both below average centers so i guess neither team has the advantage here.
I also, think at the PG position the late '90s have a better mix with the Harper and Kerr combination. The late '90s have a slight edge at defense with Harper but Kerr and Paxson could both flame threes. Also, Harper was much tougher then BJ.
At the PF position, Rodman was better at rebounding than Grant and their defense were both really good. But I think that having MJ and Pippen at their athletic primes who were both very good at rebounding for the positions they played compensates for it.
At the SF position with Pippen I think that his shooting game was a little more polished for the second three-peat but the younger Pippen played better defense, was more athletic and very good at grabbing boards. Passing wise, I think it's a tie. Overall, I think that Pippen was slightly better during the first three-peat.
Now at the SG position.....In the early '90s there was almost nothing that MJ couldn't do. He could shoot jumpers really well, drive into the lane and finish better than any guard that I've ever seen. He played better defense and was still very good at passing. He also had more stamina to be able to play more minutes.
Even though the late '90s win in most categories, I think that the younger Pippen and the magnitude of MJ's prime beats the late '90s. In the games, it wouldn't take very long for the team to devise the offensive gameplan. With MJ and Pippen getting most of the points, there wouldn't need to be that much ball distribution unless there's a wide open Paxson or easy dunks. For the late '90s, I think that the older Jordan would have a much tougher time scoring with a younger Jordan hounding him (and Pippen could help if younger MJ got into foul trouble). I also think that the older Pippen would have a harder time scoring. With this, I don't think Kukoc would be enough.
After looking at it as a whole, I could be wrong and the real X factor is the older, wiser Phil Jackson.
I believe the 1st 3Peat (F3P) Bulls were better than the 2nd 3Peat
(S3P) Bulls.
First, the F3P Bulls were younger. The S3P Bulls couldn't keep up with
those young guys. F3P Michael was better, more efficient and could
raise his game even higher if he wanted to (he could have broken 70 in
game 1 of the 92 Finals, for example). S3P MJ couldn't have done that.
F3P Pippen and S3P Pippen basically cancel each other out. However
Grant was more versatile than Dennis Rodman. Dennis Rodman was a great
rebounder but he was 35-37 years old when he played for the Bulls. He
was a much better player in Detroit than he was in Chicago.
Rodman averaged 5.2 pts, 2.8 asts, 15.3 rebs, 0.6 stls, 0.3 blks, 2.0
tov on 45 fg% in F3P.
Grant averaged 13.4 pts, 2.5 asts, 9.3 rebs, 1.2 stls, 1.3 blks, 1.3
tov on 54 fg% in S3P.
Grant averaged more points, more steals, more blocks, less turnovers
and he shot a LOT better from the field.
This doesn't take into account the havoc Grant created on the floor
defensively (full court and half court) and it also doesn't measure
the distractions, suspensions and drama Rodman brought to the table
every year he was in Chicago. Rodman missed an average of 15 games per
season during the S3P, Grant only missed an average of 3 games during the F3P.
S3P Ron Harper was a real advantage defensively over F3P John Paxson
but John's advantage was his sharpshooting and clutchness. Ron gets
the edge here, but John's defensive deficiency would be cancelled out
because of the extra versatility of a young MJ and Pippen (full court
defense, half court defense, more spring and more stamina) that S3P MJ
and Pip could not provide. In other words, the S3P Bulls needed Ron
Harper's 6-6 frame and defensive ability because MJ was too old to
chase down younger guys defensively and still have super-human
efficiency. With that said, S3P MJ still wasn't as efficient as the
F3P version.
The bench may be the only real advantage the S3P Bulls might have had
over the F3P version. However, the starters for the F3P team was just
plain better and more versatile than the starters for the S3P team.
They were younger, could play full-court defense or half-court
defense. MJ was holding down guards from Isiah Thomas to Clyde Drexler
while still shooting over 50% from the field. Horace was putting up
numbers without getting suspended every 5th game. John Paxson was a
dependable shooter in the clutch to take pressure off of double and
triple teams on MJ -- and when he lost a step, BJ Armstrong stepped
in.
Toni Kucoc was a spark for S3P offensively, but he was a huge
liability on defense. Soft as tissue paper. And fragile emotionally
too. If he didn't start, he'd sulk. The rest of the bench was full of
old stiffs like John Salley, James Edwards and Robert Parish. The
young Bulls had guys like BJ Armstrong, Cliff Levingston, Craig Hodges
and Scott Williams that would provide a real spark. Especially in the
91 and 92 playoffs.
The S3P Bulls had to pace themselves because of age. MJ, Scottie,
Harper and Rodman were all advanced in age and couldn't put out max
effort 48 min/game. They had trouble with young, athletic teams like
the Sonics and Lakers. They were smart enough to pick and choose when
to go all out and still win championships. The S3P Bulls was a great
team but they wouldn't have been able to pick and choose against the
F3P Bulls. MJ had the same heart and hunger but he had young legs and
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6og_pOVi2w"]stamina that amazed even other NBA stars[/URL].
As great as MJ was, he was known to get a little tired if he had to
carry too much of the load for too long in the S3P. He was good enough
to withstand it and lead his team because no one was good enough to
outlast him even at 90%. But we're talking about F3P MJ. That guy
never got tired. He was a machine.
It would be close but ultimately I choose F3P Bulls.
Awesome breakdown, Da Realist. I agree wholeheartedly.
...
Really close...
1. 96 Bulls
2. 92 Bulls
3. 97 Bulls
4. 91 Bulls
5. 93 Bulls
6. 98 Bulls
Could go either way...But the 96 Bulls were the best
[QUOTE=Glove_20]Really close...
1. 96 Bulls
2. 92 Bulls
3. 97 Bulls
4. 91 Bulls
5. 93 Bulls
6. 98 Bulls
Could go either way...But the 96 Bulls were the best[/QUOTE]
I almost completely agree with that order, although i think i put the '98 Bulls just slightly ahead of the '93 Bulls.
I think the 2nd Bulls 3pt had a better team.
It's just like with Kobe now. Kobe who isnt athletic anymore, is now winning more than ever b4 ( barring the Shaq years) beccause he has learned how to win. Learned to trust his teammates ( unless their is a big game 10-29 cough cough).
MJ in his 2nd peat learned how to be a winner 72-10 69-13 62-20 ( scottie injured for most of the year). MJ started trusting his teammates more also. Dennis Rodman was such a beast on the boards.
[QUOTE=Glove_20]Really close...
1. 96 Bulls
2. 92 Bulls
3. 97 Bulls
4. 91 Bulls
5. 93 Bulls
6. 98 Bulls
Could go either way...But the 96 Bulls were the best[/QUOTE]
Perfect list.
[QUOTE=lilojmayo]I think the 2nd Bulls 3pt had a better team.
It's just like with Kobe now. Kobe who isnt athletic anymore, is now winning more than ever b4 ( barring the Shaq years) beccause he has learned how to win. Learned to trust his teammates ( unless their is a big game 10-29 cough cough).
MJ in his 2nd peat learned how to be a winner 72-10 69-13 62-20 ( scottie injured for most of the year). MJ started trusting his teammates more also. Dennis Rodman was such a beast on the boards.[/QUOTE]
You're completely wrong. How the hell did MJ only learn how to win in the 2nd three-peat? That first three-peat had nothing to do with MJ trusting his teammates more? I hope you are not implying that Jordan's mindset in the first three-peat is about the same as Kobe's mindset when he played with Shaq.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]Perfect list.[/QUOTE]
:no: To say the '97 Bulls would beat the '91 Bulls is a HUUUUGGEE stretch IMO. We'll never know, but I would take the '91 team all the way.
It must be remembered just how hungry the '91 team was. They were killers, and in addition '91 MJ would just hound and maul '97 MJ.
Once again, we'll never know, but I would have no problem with people putting the '91 team first overall. But definitely ahead of '97 IMO.