[url]http://youtube.com/watch?v=rplU1n8oseI[/url]
:applause:
Printable View
[url]http://youtube.com/watch?v=rplU1n8oseI[/url]
:applause:
'86 Celtics & '87 Lakers > '96 Bulls:applause:
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]'86 Celtics & '87 Lakers > '96 Bulls:applause:[/QUOTE]
:(
very good, thanks for posting!
WHAT TIME IS IT??
GAME TIME, OOOOHHHH!
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]'86 Celtics & '87 Lakers > '96 Bulls:applause:[/QUOTE]
[url]http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2007/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=Finalists1-10[/url]
1. 1996 Chicago Bulls Score: 327.9
KEY FACTS
Regular-season record: 72-10
Postseason record: 15-3
Avg. scoring margin: +12.2
Avg. scoring margin, playoffs: +10.6
Finals result: Beat Seattle, 4-2 LEADERS (regular-season stats)
Scoring: Michael Jordan, 30.4 ppg
Rebounds: Dennis Rodman, 14.9 rpg
Assists: Scottie Pippen, 5.9 apg
Coach: Phil Jackson
Finals MVP: Michael Jordan
Hands down, the greatest team of all time. How can you choose another when these guys won 72 regular-season games and 14 of their first 15 in the postseason? The Bulls were so good they were first in both offensive and defensive efficiency, and outscored their opponents by 12.2 points per game.
With names like Jordan, Pippen, Rodman, and Toni Kukoc, not to mention a coach like Phil Jackson, this team was pretty much unbeatable -- in fact, seven of its playoff wins were by 17 points or more. The only nit to pick was the Bulls' consecutive losses to the Sonics in the Finals, but they were up 3-0 by then and seemingly bored with how good they were.
2. 1987 Los Angeles Lakers Score: 301.5
KEY FACTS
Regular-season record: 65-17
Postseason record: 15-3
Avg. scoring margin: +9.3
Avg. scoring margin, playoffs: +11.4
Finals result: Beat Boston, 4-2 LEADERS
Scoring: Magic Johnson, 23.9 ppg
Rebounds: A.C. Green, 7.9 rpg
Assists: Magic Johnson, 12.4 apg
Coach: Pat Riley
Finals MVP: Magic Johnson
Fittingly, the great Lakers and Celtics teams are in a virtual dead heat for second place. (You'll note that I just call the Lakers "Los Angeles" in this list -- no risk of confusing them with the Clippers here.) This L.A. team nudged ahead of Boston by virtue of winning 65 games in the regular season and then trashing the West -- 11 wins in 12 games -- to make the Finals. The Lakers beat the Celtics in six, and for the playoffs as a whole outscored their opponents by 205 points -- the best of any team on this list. Seven different players averaged double figures, led by Magic with 23.9 points per game.
3. 1986 Boston Celtics Score: 301.1
KEY FACTS
Regular-season record: 67-15
Postseason record: 15-3
Avg. scoring margin: +9.4
Avg. scoring margin, playoffs: +10.3
Finals result: Beat Houston, 4-2 LEADERS
Scoring: Larry Bird, 25.8 ppg
Rebounds: Larry Bird, 9.8 rpg
Assists: Larry Bird, 6.8 apg
Coach: K.C. Jones
Finals MVP: Larry Bird
The Celtics won 67 games in '86 behind the best frontcourt ever assembled -- Bird, Kevin McHale, Robert Parish and Bill Walton -- and followed it up by stampeding through the playoffs in 15 games. They rank behind L.A. mostly because their victory margin wasn't as strong in the playoffs. On the other hand, this isn't a bad list to be No. 3 on. And few teams will ever have five players averaging at least 15 a game in the playoffs, as Boston's legendary quintet did in this postseason.
[QUOTE=TmacsRockets][url]http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2007/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=Finalists1-10[/url]
1. 1996 Chicago Bulls Score: 327.9
KEY FACTS
Regular-season record: 72-10
Postseason record: 15-3
Avg. scoring margin: +12.2
Avg. scoring margin, playoffs: +10.6
Finals result: Beat Seattle, 4-2 LEADERS (regular-season stats)
Scoring: Michael Jordan, 30.4 ppg
Rebounds: Dennis Rodman, 14.9 rpg
Assists: Scottie Pippen, 5.9 apg
Coach: Phil Jackson
Finals MVP: Michael Jordan
Hands down, the greatest team of all time. How can you choose another when these guys won 72 regular-season games and 14 of their first 15 in the postseason? The Bulls were so good they were first in both offensive and defensive efficiency, and outscored their opponents by 12.2 points per game.
With names like Jordan, Pippen, Rodman, and Toni Kukoc, not to mention a coach like Phil Jackson, this team was pretty much unbeatable -- in fact, seven of its playoff wins were by 17 points or more. The only nit to pick was the Bulls' consecutive losses to the Sonics in the Finals, but they were up 3-0 by then and seemingly bored with how good they were.
2. 1987 Los Angeles Lakers Score: 301.5
KEY FACTS
Regular-season record: 65-17
Postseason record: 15-3
Avg. scoring margin: +9.3
Avg. scoring margin, playoffs: +11.4
Finals result: Beat Boston, 4-2 LEADERS
Scoring: Magic Johnson, 23.9 ppg
Rebounds: A.C. Green, 7.9 rpg
Assists: Magic Johnson, 12.4 apg
Coach: Pat Riley
Finals MVP: Magic Johnson
Fittingly, the great Lakers and Celtics teams are in a virtual dead heat for second place. (You'll note that I just call the Lakers "Los Angeles" in this list -- no risk of confusing them with the Clippers here.) This L.A. team nudged ahead of Boston by virtue of winning 65 games in the regular season and then trashing the West -- 11 wins in 12 games -- to make the Finals. The Lakers beat the Celtics in six, and for the playoffs as a whole outscored their opponents by 205 points -- the best of any team on this list. Seven different players averaged double figures, led by Magic with 23.9 points per game.
3. 1986 Boston Celtics Score: 301.1
KEY FACTS
Regular-season record: 67-15
Postseason record: 15-3
Avg. scoring margin: +9.4
Avg. scoring margin, playoffs: +10.3
Finals result: Beat Houston, 4-2 LEADERS
Scoring: Larry Bird, 25.8 ppg
Rebounds: Larry Bird, 9.8 rpg
Assists: Larry Bird, 6.8 apg
Coach: K.C. Jones
Finals MVP: Larry Bird
The Celtics won 67 games in '86 behind the best frontcourt ever assembled -- Bird, Kevin McHale, Robert Parish and Bill Walton -- and followed it up by stampeding through the playoffs in 15 games. They rank behind L.A. mostly because their victory margin wasn't as strong in the playoffs. On the other hand, this isn't a bad list to be No. 3 on. And few teams will ever have five players averaging at least 15 a game in the playoffs, as Boston's legendary quintet did in this postseason.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.nba.com/playoffs2004/challenge_bracket.html[/url] :applause:
[QUOTE=sonicman]very good, thanks for posting!
WHAT TIME IS IT??
GAME TIME, OOOOHHHH![/QUOTE]
:rockon:
[quote=1987_Lakers][URL="http://www.nba.com/playoffs2004/challenge_bracket.html"]http://www.nba.com/playoffs2004/challenge_bracket.html[/URL] :applause:[/quote]
:no:
Lets see, when you break it down to numbers and formulas the Bulls come out on top. When you break it down to voting and emotion the Lakers come out on top.
Thats mainly cause everyone has this dogmatic view that the 80's were the greatest era of NBA basketball and thats where all of the greatest teams ever reside. Any challenge to this is seen as blasphemy. I have 2 challenges to this notion
1. Most of the writers out there and people overall who hold the 80's in such reverence are people who grew up or first started watching the NBA during this time. They came of age at the same time as the NBA did. So they romanticize it a little. Kind of like people do with music. People tend to think that the best music was the music that came out during their adolesence. Which is the reason why you see people on the sunset strip today still holding on to Motley Crue and Poison. The same reason why my dad still listens to the Beach Boys and my grandma would only listen to Sinatra and music from the rat pack era. Also during the 80's you were pretty much in one of two groups, Lakers or Celtics. It's where many people started off becoming a lifelong fan of either of those teams.
2. All those teams during the 80's are seen as great cause they beat each other. The Lakers beat the Celtics who beat the 76ers who beat the lakers who beat the Pistons who beat the Celtics, etc. Sure the lakers ended up with the most titles from that decade but all the above teams can say that they beat the Lakers in the Finals which makes them great as well.
The Bulls on the other hand were the sole dominant team of the 90's. The Rockets 2 titles are seen as tarnished since Jordan was retired for the majority of their run. If Jordan had continued playing during those 2 years and the rockets had still won those 2 titles likely beating the Bulls for at least one of them the Rockets would be considered a GREAT team. Likewise had the Knicks, Suns, or Jazz beat the Bulls in a playoff series during the 90's they too would be considered GREAT, cause they beat the awesome Bulls. But they didn't which in some ways makes the Bulls a victim of their own dominance. People act like there was no one to challenge them, forgetting that in 93 a 3-peat was something that had been unheard of since the 60's. The Bulls were not favored in every playoff series they played either. But the fact that during their championship years they were only pushed to 7 games twice, never in the Finals makes people look back and think that the playoffs were nothing but one big unchallenged cakewalk for the Bulls. Ironically enough, many people watching basketball during this era who now degrade it (Laker Fans) were giving a multitude of reasons why Jordan and the Bulls were gonna lose many of those given playoff series.
In the end, who the better team? The Lakers Celtics or Bulls? It's debatable. I tend to go by numbers and dominance. Averaging 70 wins over 2 seasons along with not one but two 3-peats in 8 years is unprecedented and will likely never happen again. The 80's were a golden era of basketball though not likely to be matched again either. It really all comes down to who your favorite team is. But to say that any of those match ups would be dominated by anyone or go less than 7 games is ignorant.
Thats just my 2 cents.:cheers:
Pippen is one ugly delusional overrated clown and 95-96 bulls is the most overrated team in NBA history. It's easy to win that many games in a weak and diluted era, especially if the commish rigged the games for you.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]'86 Celtics & '87 Lakers > '96 Bulls:applause:[/QUOTE]
nope sorry
Pippen: The most underrated player of all time. great interview, thanks for the link.
Also don't forget how the 2000 era Lakers copied the Bulls so much, with pretty much the entire Bulls coaching staff along with Ron Harper and Horace Grant starting.
I don't think any other NBA team including the 80's Lakers has been emulated to that extent.
[QUOTE=BrianScalabrine]Pippen is one ugly delusional overrated clown and 95-96 bulls is the most overrated team in NBA history. It's easy to win that many games in a weak and diluted era, especially if the commish rigged the games for you.[/QUOTE]
:lol
[QUOTE=BrianScalabrine]Pippen is one ugly delusional overrated clown and 95-96 bulls is the most overrated team in NBA history. It's easy to win that many games in a weak and diluted era, especially if the commish rigged the games for you.[/QUOTE]
What an absurd statement. The commish rigged games? If the talent was so diluted as you say then why would he have to rig anything? I'm sure in game 6 of the 98 Finals he "totally rigged it" so Jordan would score, steal and then score again to win the title.
What a lame brain.:confusedshrug: :banghead:
[QUOTE=BrianScalabrine]Pippen is one ugly delusional overrated clown and 95-96 bulls is the most overrated team in NBA history. It's easy to win that many games in a weak and diluted era, especially if the commish rigged the games for you.[/QUOTE]
[B]Nah, Don`t hate on Pippen, He Is Underrated but there is no way the 1995-96 Bulls could beat a 1987 Lakers or even more a 1986 Celtics. The 1980s era was the most competitive ever!.
The Bulls have no Challange in the Frontline for Kareem at Center in the play-offs or the speed and scoring abilities of Worthy in his Prime. Not to mention Byron Scott`s scoring abilities, Cooper, Ac Green and Thomson and even Rambis comming in to do the hard paint job for some minutes etc..Not to mention: Magic in his Best Moment not only game wise but as a Clutch Leader and leading the way with Triple Double after another.:bowdown:
It would be laughable for the Bulls to try to Stop the 1986 Cetlics frontline with Parish, Walton and McHale from owning the Scoreboards and Rebounds. Not to mention Bird leading the way with Triple Doubles, DJ and Danny Ainge from Shooting. Celtics where Too Deep for any team and they could play any style that year. Fast Break, Half Court and could even Contain any Twin Tower Duo.:bowdown:
:confusedshrug:
Trianle Offense only works when you are facing Limited Offensive Teams dont have [U]Both a Great Offensive Frontcourt and a Great Offensive Frontline[/U], which is both the 1986 Celtics and 1987 Lakers :).
In the case of the Celtics a Great Defending Frontline too.[/B]
Depth is overrated.
On paper the 95-96 Orlando Magic were actually deeper than the Bulls.
Here's one for ya (in case this year's NBA Finals didn't drive the point home)
DEFENSE > Offense
Every time.
96 Bulls would take both the Lakers and Celtics out because they're the superior defensive team.
No one on Boston/L.A. would really stop Jordan from getting his 30-40 either. Or even stop Pippen from getting 20 IMO.
[QUOTE]Pippen is one ugly delusional overrated clown and 95-96 bulls is the most overrated team in NBA history. It's easy to win that many games in a weak and diluted era, especially if the commish rigged the games for you.[/QUOTE]
So do you like being what 19 maybe 20 max? Why is he overrated and how in gods green earth was the league diluted then? Explain...please no kidding. U mean diluted like the weak ass Similac you woulda been slugging back outta one of them dual handle, no spilly cups around that time? And the league has to be rigged nowadays because it can't get to the level it was back then in popularity or quality...
[QUOTE=Soundwave]Depth is overrated.
On paper the 95-96 Orlando Magic were actually deeper than the Bulls.
Here's one for ya (in case this year's NBA Finals didn't drive the point home)
DEFENSE > Offense
Every time.
96 Bulls would take both the Lakers and Celtics out because they're the superior defensive team.
No one on Boston/L.A. would really stop Jordan from getting his 30-40 either. Or even stop Pippen from getting 20 IMO.[/QUOTE]
The 1986 Celtics had the #1 DEFENSE IN THE NBA!!!!!!
[QUOTE=Soundwave]Depth is overrated.
On paper the 95-96 Orlando Magic were actually deeper than the Bulls.
Here's one for ya (in case this year's NBA Finals didn't drive the point home)
DEFENSE > Offense
Every time.
96 Bulls would take both the Lakers and Celtics out because they're the superior defensive team.
No one on Boston/L.A. would really stop Jordan from getting his 30-40 either. Or even stop Pippen from getting 20 IMO.[/QUOTE]
[B]You can`t compare a young Shaq and young Penny to
a [COLOR="DarkGreen"]Prime Bird, a Prime Kevin McHale and a Prime Robert Parish[/COLOR]. :hammerhead:
..[COLOR="DarkGreen"]not to mention DJ, Danny Ainge, Walton as CF in a 2 Center System, Weddman and Mr Greg Kite to pound with Rodman or Grant etc..[/COLOR]
The Bulls where a superior Defensive Team in the PERIMTER but not even near the level of Defense the Celtics had in PAINT. Not To Mention the Celtics Offense in the Paint with the Big 3:confusedshrug: .
Still the Bulls could not stop Ainge or DJ from Shooting from the outside and surely could not Stop Bird in his Prime. They couln`t even stop a 30 to 35 year old Bird with no back between 1987 and 1992 from getting 34-40 points, 10-15 Rebounds and 10-14 Assits :hammerhead:[/B]
[B]Pippen and Jordan were wasted tired trying to stop Magic in 1991 from getting 20 assits and triple doubles in the finals. Now add Kareem in 1987 to that team and a Primer Worthy, Byron Scott in his best Moment and better squad players overal than 1991
Stop Speaking Nonsense :banghead: :violin: :confusedshrug: [/B]
[QUOTE=Sir Charles]
Stop Speaking Nonsense :banghead: :violin: :confusedshrug: [/B][/QUOTE]
You should take your own advice. Stop acting like the Bulls were some pushover team with absolutely no answer for any team in the 80's.
So sick of the fact that every Bulls hater brings out the same tired 80's argument. You only do it cause it's abstract and subjective and cant be proven either way. Cause when it comes to stats and figures and records, the Bulls have it over everybody. Theres nothing subjective or abstract about that.
You've got a definite hard-on for the 90's Bulls and I'm pretty sure it has something to do with your screen name. Look I'm sorry Sir Charles that Jordan denied Barkley (along with many other players) his best shot at getting a ring but that doesnt mean that you have to endlessly try to tear them down with bulls**t speculation and conjecture. You cant tear down 72-10. You cant tear down 6 titles in 8 years. You can't tear down 2 3-peats. You can't tear down the fact that Jordan is the GOAT.
But I know you'll try. :rolleyes:
You should take your own advice. Stop acting like the Bulls were some pushover team with absolutely no answer for any team in the 80's.
So sick of the fact that every Bulls hater brings out the same tired 80's argument. You only do it cause it's abstract and subjective and cant be proven either way. Cause when it comes to stats and figures and records, the Bulls have it over everybody. Theres nothing subjective or abstract about that.
[B]Its a fact league expanded and weakened in the 90s:) not to mention the [U]BULLS NEVER FACED A GREAT SCORING FRONTLINE WITH FUNDAMENTALS (that could play both Great D and Score "Alot" at a High FG%). [/U]
Every time the Bulls faced the the Celtics in the 80s, even 1987, 1988, 1989 and 1990 they got Schooled 3-0 and 3-0. And it wasn`t a Celtics Big 3 in their agil and potent 20s but in their 30s :sleeping .[/B]
You've got a definite hard-on for the 90's Bulls and I'm pretty sure it has something to do with your screen name. Look I'm sorry Sir Charles that Jordan denied Barkley (along with many other players) his best shot at getting a ring but that doesnt mean that you have to endlessly try to tear them down with bulls**t speculation and conjecture. You cant tear down 72-10. You cant tear down 6 titles in 8 years. You can't tear down 2 3-peats. You can't tear down the fact that Jordan is the GOAT.
I[B] am not an anti Bulls dude. I am just not a cocksucking hyped 90s Media Jordan-Pippen Bulls Fan like 99% of the kids whom keep avoiding the fact that the 90s competition sucked compared to the 80s and that fact the Bulls never faced a Great Scoring Frontline Duo or Trio in the Play-Offs. :confusedshrug:.
Not to mention the Bulls hardly faced Great Teams in the 90s.:confusedshrug:
The only Average Frontline the Bulls ever faced in the Play-Offs was the 1992Knicks, strangely enough = this untalented offensive team took them all the way game 7! :ohwell: just by their Great Defense. If the Knicks had another Frontline Scorer like Nique, Barkley examples they would have knocked the Bulls way = That is as obvious as recognizing Jordan as the Goat SG.
The Bulls could never beat a Magic to Worthy-Kareem Duo or the McHale-Parish-Bird Trio :no: :confusedshrug:
Stop the cocksucking and get real. :violin:
No Offensive Triangle Offense Backcourt-Oriented Team will Ever Beat a:
"PRIME" GREAT OFFENSIVE FRONTLINE that also HAS GREAT D.
And in the mid and early 1980s Lakers you not only had a Great Backcourt with prime Magic and Scott/Cooper but also to 2 Great Scoring Frontliners: Kareem and Worthy. Not to mention a Deeper Team than the Bulls.
[U]Just go look at the 2008 Championship Series Lakers vs Celtics to understand what im saying.[/U][/B]
[B][COLOR="Red"]1980s = Bulls Owned Every Possible Way [/COLOR][/B]:violin:
Sir Charles is easily -- [b]easily[/b] -- the most obnoxious poster on this site. And that's [i]including[/i] all the Kobe groupies. :oldlol:
[QUOTE=Loki]Sir Charles is easily -- [b]easily[/b] -- the most obnoxious poster on this site. And that's [i]including[/i] all the Kobe groupies. :oldlol:[/QUOTE]
[B]Loki don`t hate on me because I am awakening many 90s media brainwashed Bulls fans.:)
"Kobe Groupies" hahaha :roll:
(Kobe is No Jordan. Its A Fact :confusedshrug: )[/B]
All your arguments are coulda shoulda woulda. If so and so did this or if this guy was healthy or if this player was in his prime. You can't deal with the facts as they are so you deal with the subjective. And you gloss over the fact that there were 4 expansion teams in the 80's. The whole expansion argument is lame any ways cause is based on the notion that without expansion every team would of been better EXCEPT the Bulls.
When the Bulls won 72 games all of the haters harped on the fact that it was an expansion year while conveniently leaving out the fact that 1972 was an expansion year too.
Look I'm not saying that cause the Bulls won 72 games that it makes them far and away the better than the 80's Lakers or Celtics. Don't forget the Pistons either. I'm saying that it puts them up on the Mt. Rushmore of great teams. They have just as strong of an argument, if not better in some aspects for being considered the greatest of all time as any of those other teams do. Thats not **** sucking, thats being real.
And once again about this great team stuff. In order for any other team in the 90's to be considered great they would of had to beat the Bulls Would the Pistons of been considered great if they never got past the Celtics? Probably not. And using your logic that would bring the Celtics down a notch cause then they wouldn't of beaten a great Pistons team. It's so f**king convoluted. The Bulls took on all comers and ended up winning 6 out of eight years. They won series that they weren't supposed to win and kept many future hall of famers from winning rings. History would of judged the Knicks Suns and Jazz much differently if they had of beaten the great Micheal Jordan and the Chicago Bulls. Yet all you choose to do is pull some kind of negativity out of that.
Look say what you want. Bring up all your abstract arguments that will never get a chance to be proven. But if you're gonna say to me that Jordan and Pippen werent one of if not the greatest duo in NBA history, that Jordan Pippen and Rodman weren't one of the greatest trios of all time, that Phil Jackson isn't one of the greatest coaches ever and that players like Paxson and Kerr weren't clutch when it counted in the playoffs, then I'll just let you waste away in your own myopia.
[QUOTE=puppychili]All your arguments are coulda shoulda woulda. If so and so did this or if this guy was healthy or if this player was in his prime. You can't deal with the facts as they are so you deal with the subjective. And you gloss over the fact that there were 4 expansion teams in the 80's. The whole expansion argument is lame any ways cause is based on the notion that without expansion every team would of been better EXCEPT the Bulls.
When the Bulls won 72 games all of the haters harped on the fact that it was an expansion year while conveniently leaving out the fact that 1972 was an expansion year too.
Look I'm not saying that cause the Bulls won 72 games that it makes them far and away the better than the 80's Lakers or Celtics. Don't forget the Pistons either. I'm saying that it puts them up on the Mt. Rushmore of great teams. They have just as strong of an argument, if not better in some aspects for being considered the greatest of all time as any of those other teams do. Thats not **** sucking, thats being real.
And once again about this great team stuff. In order for any other team in the 90's to be considered great they would of had to beat the Bulls Would the Pistons of been considered great if they never got past the Celtics? Probably not. And using your logic that would bring the Celtics down a notch cause then they wouldn't of beaten a great Pistons team. It's so f**king convoluted. The Bulls took on all comers and ended up winning 6 out of eight years. They won series that they weren't supposed to win and kept many future hall of famers from winning rings. History would of judged the Knicks Suns and Jazz much differently if they had of beaten the great Micheal Jordan and the Chicago Bulls. Yet all you choose to do is pull some kind of negativity out of that.
Look say what you want. Bring up all your abstract arguments that will never get a chance to be proven. But if you're gonna say to me that Jordan and Pippen werent one of if not the greatest duo in NBA history, that Jordan Pippen and Rodman weren't one of the greatest trios of all time, that Phil Jackson isn't one of the greatest coaches ever and that players like Paxson and Kerr weren't clutch when it counted in the playoffs, then I'll just let you waste away in your own myopia.[/QUOTE]
[B]Why did the Pistons beat the Celtics?
Easy. They had the...
THE BEST PERIMETER DEFENSE (before the Bulls) and the BEST FRONTLINE DEFENSE of the 1980s....
THEY COULD DEAL WITH "BOTH" THREATS!
but....their Offensive Capabilities Relied to Much on their talented PG Isiah Thomas, whose Role as PG ofcourse was 1st: To Create and then Secondly 2nd: To Score.
It is unatural B-Ball wise to have your PG taking the Scoring Load for the Whole Team and that eventually will kill a team, especially if this [U]iTeam has No Interior Frontline Great D and even More with No Exterior Frountcourt Great D (with the Guards taking the Whole Scoring Load)[/U] to contain or diminuish the Opponent who had either [U]Great Back Court Offense[/U] or [U]Great Fronlinte Offense [/U]
(Teams like the 80s Lakers and Celtics, had both!).
Adrian Dantley. Their only Real Offensive Socoring Threat the Pistons had Left Early and was not in his prime in the late 80s. He played til 1989. So he was part of the schooling that the Pistons have to Jordan`s Bulls from 1984 to 1987 and Jordan-Pippen`s (Grant included) Bulls from 1987 to 1989[/B]
[B]And If you want to go by facts then...:confusedshrug:
1980s Bulls = Nothing Against Celtic Big 3 and Laker Showtime. [/B]
Nice link. That season seemed to take on a life of its own. It took me about a month to realize they were playing out of this world basketball and after that the first thing I checked in the paper was the bulls box. Only one other time that has happened that something gets my attention off the lakers box score first thing in the morning, and that is one Yankees season that I am convinced was the best baseball team that will play in my lifetime.
The team with the most assits wins, period.
I'm assuming you meant the 90's Bulls.
Nothing though? Nothing at all? That what makes your argument so stupid. To say that a championship team led by Michael Jordan would have [B]nothing[/B] against [U]any [/U] team, from the 80's or otherwise has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read on this board.
[QUOTE=puppychili]I'm assuming you meant the 90's Bulls.
Nothing though? Nothing at all? That what makes your argument so stupid. To say that a championship team led by Michael Jordan would have [B]nothing[/B] against [U]any [/U] team, from the 80's or otherwise has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read on this board.[/QUOTE]
He's an idiot. I don't even bother with him anymore. Mind you, I think the '86 Celts are definitely better than any version of the Bulls and the '87 Lakers most likely are as well. But this dude constantly spouts nonsense.
[B]If Barkley had [COLOR="Red"][SIZE="4"]Pippen[/SIZE][/COLOR], he would have had [COLOR="Lime"][SIZE="4"][U]8 rings[/U][/SIZE][/COLOR]!!!![/B] [B]After all, Pippen played [COLOR="Magenta"][SIZE="5"][U]THE MOST MINUTES [/U][/SIZE][/COLOR]in the '91 playoffs, so clearly he was [COLOR="SeaGreen"][SIZE="3"][I]the KEY PLAYER[/I][/SIZE][/COLOR] for the Bulls when they won![/B]
[QUOTE=Loki]The team with the most assits wins, period.[/QUOTE]
[B]Some Basketball Laws:
LAW 1: [COLOR="Red"]A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team with a Good Defensive Frontline but A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline (The 90s Bulls) can Beat A Team that has: an "Average to Bad Offensive/Defensive Frontline" and an "Good, Average or Bad" Offensive/Defensisve Backcourt
= Most of the 1990s Teams the Bulls faced :confusedshrug: [/COLOR]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAW 2: [COLOR="red"] A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team with a Good Defensive Frontline but A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline (The 90s Bulls)[/COLOR] will have A Hard Time Beating [COLOR="Blue"]A Team that has: a "Great Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Defensive Backcourt" but with a "Bad Offensive Frontline" and Good "Offensive Backcourt"
= 1980s Pistons (owned the Bulls from 1984 to 1990) :confusedshrug: [/COLOR]
[COLOR="blue"]*With Adrian Dantley they would have had not a "Good Offensive Backcourt" but a "Great Offensive Backcourt". So that would have persented even more trouble for the Bulls...
...As it did from [U]1987 to 1989[/U] :) [/COLOR]
LAW 3: [COLOR="Red"]A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team with a Good Defensive Frontline but A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline (The 90s Bulls)[/COLOR] will have even a harder time Beating A[COLOR="Navy"] Team that has: a "Great Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Defensive Backcourt" with an "Average to Good Offensive Frontline" and an "Average to Bad Offensive Backcourt"
= Early 1990s Knicks (took them To Game 7 in 1992)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The Knicks Just Needed an Offensive Weopon (apart from Ewing) in either one of their [U]Frontline Forward Spots[/U].:)[/COLOR]
LAW 4:[COLOR="Red"] "A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team" with a "Good Defensive Frontline" but "A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline" (The 90s Bulls)[/COLOR][U]Most Probably Not Win Over A[/U] [COLOR="DarkRed"]Team that has: a "Good Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Offense Frontline" with an "Average to Good Defensive Backcourt" and "A Great Offensive Backcourt"
=1980s Showtime Lakers. Especially the 1985 to 1987 Lakers with Kareem-Magic and Worthy together plus their Supporting Casts of Scott, Thompson, Cooper, Green, Rambis.[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally....
LAW 5: [COLOR="red"]"A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team" with a "Good Defensive Frontline" but "A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline" (The 90s Bulls)[/COLOR] Has [U]No No Chance :no: [/U][COLOR="DarkGreen"] In Beating A Team that has: a "Great Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Offensive Frontline with "Good Offensive Backcourt" and an "Great Defensive Backcourt"
=1986 Celtics with McHale-Bird-Parish-Walton-Ainge-DJ-Kite-Wedman, Siesting.[/COLOR]
The only way fro the Bulls to try to win some games is quite simple:[/B]
[B]Locate Pippen as the PG for Most of the Game and Kukoc at the SF for Most of the game. This way with Kukoc and Pippen both in you would have more Scoring Possibilites but then again with [U]No Pippen in the SF spot = you would have a WEAKER DEFENSE for the Likes of Bird-McHale-Parish and Walton[/U] ([COLOR="DarkGreen"]Yes the Celtics Strenght = Frontline Offense and Defense[/COLOR]!).
[U]If you put Harper in for Pippen as a PG and Pippen as the SF for Most of the Game you will [/U]
[COLOR="Blue"]1st- Loose Creative Possibilities to make the Frontline Offense Score and
2nd- Consume Pippen. Whom cannot asoume the role of trying to:
1st: Try to Stop: Larry Bird!
2nd: Become the Second Scoring Threat after Jordan,
3rd: Rebound over Bird-McHale-Parish-Walton and
4th: Create as a Point-Forward.
= Simply To much Load for Pip.[/COLOR]
[U]Matchups[/U]
[U][COLOR="Blue"]Backcourt:[/COLOR][/U]
[COLOR="Red"][U]Jordan vs Ainge/DJ[/U]: Jordan Would Own Danny Ainge Offensively but still would not prevent him from Scoring Outside Shots.
(JORDAN WINS!) [/COLOR]
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Harper vs Ainge: Both will go at it with Harper having the edge in his Drives but then again this is Prime Ainge and Old Harper
(Ballanced Match Up)[/COLOR]
[U][COLOR="Blue"]Frontline[/COLOR][/U]
[COLOR="DarkGreen"][U]McHale vs Rodman[/U] : Rodman Would get Owned by a 1986 McHale Offensively and Defensively. Rodman will only Outrebound McHale but would Not Stop Him from Scoring Nor Score on Him.
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=mchalke01&p2=rodmade01[/url]
Mchale: 22.5 PPG (57.9% FG), 8.8 RPG; 1.5 BPG vs Rodman.
This is counting stats from 1990-91 to 1992-93 = A 33 to 35 year old Mchale not a [U]Prime 1985-86 McHale at age: 28! [/U]:banghead:
(McHALE WINS!)[/COLOR]
[COLOR="DarkGreen"][U]Bird vs Pippen-Kukoc[/U]. Bird would own both of them Offensively and Rebounding Wise. None will Prevent Bird from owning the Boards, Posting Up for his 12-15 Jumpers, Scoring in other ways and Making Great Passes for Parish-McHale-Walton or even spoting up DJ or Ainge for Open Shots after Pick & Rolls made by the Frontline.:confusedshrug:
Pippen will Challange Bird in the Perimeter but Bird always will do what he used to do against faster players. Just wait closer to his Frontline to assure rebounds waiting for Pippen to Shoot from the Outside, which = Pippen`s Not a Reliable Open Shooter.
Kukoc will Challange Bird in the Post but then then again Bird will have an easier time Offensively with Kukoc than with Pippen (because Pippen is obviously a better Defender).
Reminder***Bird owned Pippen from 1988 to 1992[/B][/COLOR]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=birdla01&p2=pippesc01[/url]
[B][COLOR="DarkGreen"]But remember this time we are talking not about a 31 to 35 year old Bird but a [U]Prime 23 to 29 year old Bird. And yes Before his injury in 1989 :confusedshrug: [/U]
(BIRD WINS!)
[U]Parish vs Bulls Center[/U]: Any Bull`s Center would get Owned by a 1986 Parish both Offensively and Defensively.
(PARISH WINS!)
Then agin if Rodman needs a Pounding, The Celtics will just put in Walton for a Twin Tower System with Parish and McHale, putting Bird as a SG for some minutes and then later put in 6`11 ft and 250 lbs Greg Kite = A Dennis Rodman like type agressive Paint Player that was famous for brawls. Not to mention the guy was a 9.3 R.P/36 Minutes. [/COLOR]
[U]RESUME OF THE LAWS: [/U]
"[U]A Great Frontline (Composed of 3 Players) Will Always Own a Good/Great Backcourt (Composed of 2 Players) [/U]" .:hammerhead:[/B]
[U]Examples:[/U]
[B][COLOR="Blue"]2008 Finals Lakers v.s Celtics Result = Same would happen to the 95-96 Bulls if they faced a 1985-86 Celtics[/COLOR][/B]
[B]* [U]In the Case of the Bulls. The Bulls can only assure one spot in the Game Matchups of [COLOR="Blue"]Total Ownership by Jordan[/COLOR] = that is [COLOR="Red"]Jordan vs Ainge/DJ[/COLOR][/U].
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Harper vs Ainge is a Ballanced Won.[/COLOR]
The Rest of the Matchups:
Bird vs Pippen: [COLOR="DarkGreen"]Bird Wins[/COLOR]
McHale vs Rodman: [COLOR="darkgreen"]Mchale Wins[/COLOR]
Parish vs Bulls Center=[COLOR="DarkGreen"] Parish[/COLOR] [COLOR="Blue"]Total Ownership![/COLOR][/B]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[B][SIZE="4"]The 1995-96 Bulls Have "Very Little Chances" of Beating a 1984-85/1986-87 Lakers and
Pretty Much "No Chance" in Beating a 1985-86 Celtics (Greatest Team Ever) :confusedshrug: [/SIZE][/B]
The 90s Bulls wouldn't have beaten the 80s Magic or Lakers.
But that doesn't prove Magic or Bird's superiority over Jordan in any way.
It just proves Bull's #2 through #12 was significantly weaker than the Celtics and Laker's #2 through #12.
Because make no mistake, the best player of all three teams is still Michael Jordan.
[QUOTE=EricForman]The 90s Bulls wouldn't have beaten the 80s Magic or Lakers.
But that doesn't prove Magic or Bird's superiority over Jordan in any way.
It just proves Bull's #2 through #12 was significantly weaker than the Celtics and Laker's #2 through #12.
Because make no mistake, the best player of all three teams is still Michael Jordan.[/QUOTE]
[B]Being a Better Player Has Nothing To do With Your Team Winning or Winning More than the Other Player...:confusedshrug:
Its a prooven fact (I have given enough evidence read at the top) that the 1995/96 Bulls have "Very Little Chance" of Beating the 1984-85/1986-87 Lakers, and Absoluetly "No Chance" in Beating the 1986-86 Celtics". :confusedshrug: [/B]
[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]Being a Better Player Has Nothing To do With Your Team Winning or Winning More than the Other Player...:confusedshrug:
Its a prooven fact (I have given enough evidence read at the top) that the 1995/96 Bulls have "Very Little Chance" of Beating the 1984-85/1986-87 Lakers, and Absoluetly "No Chance" in Beating the 1986-86 Celtics". :confusedshrug: [/B][/QUOTE]
No wonder you're doing :confusedshrug: because your ass is confused.
Where did I say the Bull would win? I know the Bulls would probably lose to the Celtics or Lakers in a 7 game series. But I'm trying to say that's just cause Magic/Bird had such a stacked team.
I say that because most of the time this statement is bought up to somewhat downplay Jordan or hype up Magic.
Bulls in six over both the Celtics and Lakers.
The Bulls would put Pippen on Magic or Bird and that would completely disrupt their entire "run n' gun" offense and it would change the entire game. Jordan and Rodman would then be further create chaos on the defensive end.
The Celtics and Lakers both had problems versus Detroit and the Bulls were every bit as good defensively, probably even better because they were more athletic.
Dumars at 6'4 simply can't do the things Pippen at 6'7 could do defensively.
The Celtics interior defense was so good that it got shredded to 63 points by a 2nd year Michael Jordan on their own home floor. The Celtics wouldn't be able to do anything to stop Jordan. Or even Pippen IMO (he would get his 20+ too offsetting a lot of Bird's offense).
[QUOTE=Soundwave]Bulls in six over both the Celtics and Lakers.
The Bulls would put Pippen on Magic or Bird and that would completely disrupt their entire "run n' gun" offense and it would change the entire game. Jordan and Rodman would then be further create chaos on the defensive end.
The Celtics and Lakers both had problems versus Detroit and the Bulls were every bit as good defensively, probably even better because they were more athletic.
Dumars at 6'4 simply can't do the things Pippen at 6'7 could do defensively.
The Celtics interior defense was so good that it got shredded to 63 points by a 2nd year Michael Jordan on their own home floor. The Celtics wouldn't be able to do anything to stop Jordan. Or even Pippen IMO (he would get his 20+ too offsetting a lot of Bird's offense).[/QUOTE]
I think you're overrating Pip.
He's one of the greatest defenders, no doubt.
But at the end of the day, Magic and Bird are still MAgic and Bird. They wouldn't let Pip get in their way.
[QUOTE=Soundwave]Bulls in six over both the Celtics and Lakers.
The Bulls would put Pippen on Magic or Bird and that would completely disrupt their entire "run n' gun" offense and it would change the entire game. Jordan and Rodman would then be further create chaos on the defensive end.
The Celtics and Lakers both had problems versus Detroit and the Bulls were every bit as good defensively, probably even better because they were more athletic.
Dumars at 6'4 simply can't do the things Pippen at 6'7 could do defensively.
The Celtics interior defense was so good that it got shredded to 63 points by a 2nd year Michael Jordan on their own home floor. The Celtics wouldn't be able to do anything to stop Jordan. Or even Pippen IMO (he would get his 20+ too offsetting a lot of Bird's offense).[/QUOTE]
:no:
[B][COLOR="Black"]1984-85/1986-87 Lakers vs 1995-96 Bulls = Lakers in 7
1986-86 Celtics vs 1995-96 Bulls = Celtics in 6[/COLOR][/B]
[B]Read this and Learn Why:[/B]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
[B][U]Some Basketball Laws[/U]:
LAW 1: [COLOR="Red"]A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team with a Good Defensive Frontline but A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline (The 90s Bulls) can Beat A Team that has: an "Average to Bad Offensive/Defensive Frontline" and an "Good, Average or Bad" Offensive/Defensisve Backcourt
= Most of the 1990s Teams the Bulls faced [/COLOR]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAW 2: [COLOR="red"] A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team with a Good Defensive Frontline but A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline (The 90s Bulls)[/COLOR] will have A Hard Time Beating [COLOR="Blue"]A Team that has: a "Great Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Defensive Backcourt" but with a "Bad Offensive Frontline" and Good "Offensive Backcourt"
= 1980s Pistons (owned the Bulls from 1984 to 1990) :confusedshrug: [/COLOR]
[COLOR="blue"]*With Adrian Dantley they would have had not a "Good Offensive Backcourt" but a "Great Offensive Backcourt". So that would have persented even more trouble for the Bulls...
...As it did from [U]1987 to 1989[/U] :) [/COLOR]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAW 3: [COLOR="Red"]A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team with a Good Defensive Frontline but A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline (The 90s Bulls)[/COLOR] will have even a harder time Beating A[COLOR="Navy"] Team that has: a "Great Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Defensive Backcourt" with an "Average to Good Offensive Frontline" and an "Average to Bad Offensive Backcourt"
= Early 1990s Knicks (took them To Game 7 in 1992)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The Knicks Just Needed an Offensive Weopon (apart from Ewing) in either one of their [U]Frontline Forward Spots[/U].:)[/COLOR]
LAW 4:[COLOR="Red"] "A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team" with a "Good Defensive Frontline" but "A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline" (The 90s Bulls)[/COLOR][U]Most Probably Not Win Over A[/U] [COLOR="DarkRed"]Team that has: a "Good Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Offense Frontline" with an "Average to Good Defensive Backcourt" and "A Great Offensive Backcourt"
=1980s Showtime Lakers. Especially the 1985 to 1987 Lakers with Kareem-Magic and Worthy together plus their Supporting Casts of Scott, Thompson, Cooper, Green, Rambis.[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally....
LAW 5: [COLOR="red"]"A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team" with a "Good Defensive Frontline" but "A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline" (The 90s Bulls)[/COLOR] Has [U]No No Chance :no: [/U][COLOR="DarkGreen"] In Beating A Team that has: a "Great Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Offensive Frontline with "Good Offensive Backcourt" and an "Great Defensive Backcourt"
=1986 Celtics with McHale-Bird-Parish-Walton-Ainge-DJ-Kite-Wedman, Siesting.[/COLOR]
The only way fro the Bulls to try to win some games is quite simple:[/B]
[B]Locate Pippen as the PG for Most of the Game and Kukoc at the SF for Most of the game. This way with Kukoc and Pippen both in you would have more Scoring Possibilites but then again with [U]No Pippen in the SF spot = you would have a WEAKER DEFENSE for the Likes of Bird-McHale-Parish and Walton[/U] ([COLOR="DarkGreen"]Yes the Celtics Strenght = Frontline Offense and Defense[/COLOR]!).
[U]If you put Harper in for Pippen as a PG and Pippen as the SF for Most of the Game you will [/U]
[COLOR="Blue"]1st- Loose Creative Possibilities to make the Frontline Offense Score and
2nd- Consume Pippen. Whom cannot asoume the role of trying to:
1st: Try to Stop: Larry Bird!
2nd: Become the Second Scoring Threat after Jordan,
3rd: Rebound over Bird-McHale-Parish-Walton and
4th: Create as a Point-Forward.
= Simply To much Load for Pip.[/COLOR]
[U]Matchups[/U]
[U][COLOR="Blue"]Backcourt:[/COLOR][/U]
[COLOR="Red"][U]Jordan vs Ainge/DJ[/U]: Jordan Would Own Danny Ainge Offensively but still would not prevent him from Scoring Outside Shots.
(JORDAN WINS!) [/COLOR]
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Harper vs Ainge: Both will go at it with Harper having the edge in his Drives but then again this is Prime Ainge and Old Harper
(Ballanced Match Up)[/COLOR]
[U][COLOR="Blue"]Frontline[/COLOR][/U]
[COLOR="DarkGreen"][U]McHale vs Rodman[/U] : Rodman Would get Owned by a 1986 McHale Offensively and Defensively. Rodman will only Outrebound McHale but would Not Stop Him from Scoring Nor Score on Him.
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=mchalke01&p2=rodmade01[/url]
Mchale: 22.5 PPG (57.9% FG), 8.8 RPG; 1.5 BPG vs Rodman.
This is counting stats from 1990-91 to 1992-93 = A 33 to 35 year old Mchale not a [U]Prime 1985-86 McHale at age: 28! [/U]:banghead:
(McHALE WINS!)[/COLOR]
[COLOR="DarkGreen"][U]Bird vs Pippen-Kukoc[/U]. Bird would own both of them Offensively and Rebounding Wise. None will Prevent Bird from owning the Boards, Posting Up for his 12-15 Jumpers, Scoring in other ways and Making Great Passes for Parish-McHale-Walton or even spoting up DJ or Ainge for Open Shots after Pick & Rolls made by the Frontline.:confusedshrug:
Pippen will Challange Bird in the Perimeter but Bird always will do what he used to do against faster players. Just wait closer to his Frontline to assure rebounds waiting for Pippen to Shoot from the Outside, which = Pippen`s Not a Reliable Open Shooter.
Kukoc will Challange Bird in the Post but then then again Bird will have an easier time Offensively with Kukoc than with Pippen (because Pippen is obviously a better Defender).
[U]Reminder***Bird owned Pippen from 1988 to 1992[/U][/B][/COLOR]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=birdla01&p2=pippesc01[/url]
[B][COLOR="DarkGreen"]But remember this time we are talking not about a 31 to 35 year old Bird but a [U]Prime 23 to 29 year old Bird. And yes Before his injury in 1989 :confusedshrug: [/U]
(BIRD WINS!)
[U]Parish vs Bulls Center[/U]: Any Bull`s Center would get Owned by a 1986 Parish both Offensively and Defensively.
(PARISH WINS!)
Then agin if Rodman needs a Pounding, The Celtics will just put in Walton for a Twin Tower System with Parish and McHale, putting Bird as a SG for some minutes and then later put in 6`11 ft and 250 lbs Greg Kite = A Dennis Rodman like type agressive Paint Player that was famous for brawls. Not to mention the guy was a 9.3 R.P/36 Minutes. [/COLOR]
[U]RESUME OF THE LAWS: [/U]
"[U]A Great Frontline (Composed of 3 Players) Will Always Own a Good/Great Backcourt (Composed of 2 Players) [/U]" .:hammerhead:[/B]
[U]Examples:[/U]
[B][COLOR="Blue"]2008 Finals Lakers v.s Celtics Result = Same would happen to the 95-96 Bulls if they faced a 1985-86 Celtics[/COLOR][/B]
[B]* [U]In the Case of the Bulls. The Bulls can only assure one spot in the Game Matchups of [COLOR="Blue"]Total Ownership by Jordan[/COLOR] = that is [COLOR="Red"]Jordan vs Ainge/DJ[/COLOR][/U].
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Harper vs Ainge is a Ballanced Won.[/COLOR]
The Rest of the Matchups:
Bird vs Pippen: [COLOR="DarkGreen"]Bird Wins[/COLOR]
McHale vs Rodman: [COLOR="darkgreen"]Mchale Wins[/COLOR]
Parish vs Bulls Center=[COLOR="DarkGreen"] Parish[/COLOR] [COLOR="Blue"]Total Ownership![/COLOR][/B]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
[B][SIZE="4"]The 1995-96 Bulls Have "Very Little Chances" of Beating a 1984-85/1986-87 Lakers and
Pretty Much "No Chance" in Beating a 1985-86 Celtics (Greatest Team Ever) :confusedshrug: [/SIZE][/B]
[QUOTE=Sir Charles]:no:
[B][COLOR="Black"]1984-85/1986-87 Lakers vs 1995-96 Bulls = Lakers in 7
1986-86 Celtics vs 1995-96 Bulls = Celtics in 6[/COLOR][/B]
[B]Read this and Learn Why:[/B]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
[B][U]Some Basketball Laws[/U]:
LAW 1: [COLOR="Red"]A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team with a Good Defensive Frontline but A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline (The 90s Bulls) can Beat A Team that has: an "Average to Bad Offensive/Defensive Frontline" and an "Good, Average or Bad" Offensive/Defensisve Backcourt
= Most of the 1990s Teams the Bulls faced [/COLOR]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAW 2: [COLOR="red"] A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team with a Good Defensive Frontline but A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline (The 90s Bulls)[/COLOR] will have A Hard Time Beating [COLOR="Blue"]A Team that has: a "Great Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Defensive Backcourt" but with a "Bad Offensive Frontline" and Good "Offensive Backcourt"
= 1980s Pistons (owned the Bulls from 1984 to 1990) :confusedshrug: [/COLOR]
[COLOR="blue"]*With Adrian Dantley they would have had not a "Good Offensive Backcourt" but a "Great Offensive Backcourt". So that would have persented even more trouble for the Bulls...
...As it did from [U]1987 to 1989[/U] :) [/COLOR]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAW 3: [COLOR="Red"]A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team with a Good Defensive Frontline but A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline (The 90s Bulls)[/COLOR] will have even a harder time Beating A[COLOR="Navy"] Team that has: a "Great Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Defensive Backcourt" with an "Average to Good Offensive Frontline" and an "Average to Bad Offensive Backcourt"
= Early 1990s Knicks (took them To Game 7 in 1992)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The Knicks Just Needed an Offensive Weopon (apart from Ewing) in either one of their [U]Frontline Forward Spots[/U].:)[/COLOR]
LAW 4:[COLOR="Red"] "A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team" with a "Good Defensive Frontline" but "A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline" (The 90s Bulls)[/COLOR][U]Most Probably Not Win Over A[/U] [COLOR="DarkRed"]Team that has: a "Good Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Offense Frontline" with an "Average to Good Defensive Backcourt" and "A Great Offensive Backcourt"
=1980s Showtime Lakers. Especially the 1985 to 1987 Lakers with Kareem-Magic and Worthy together plus their Supporting Casts of Scott, Thompson, Cooper, Green, Rambis.[/COLOR]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally....
LAW 5: [COLOR="red"]"A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team" with a "Good Defensive Frontline" but "A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline" (The 90s Bulls)[/COLOR] Has [U]No No Chance :no: [/U][COLOR="DarkGreen"] In Beating A Team that has: a "Great Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Offensive Frontline with "Good Offensive Backcourt" and an "Great Defensive Backcourt"
=1986 Celtics with McHale-Bird-Parish-Walton-Ainge-DJ-Kite-Wedman, Siesting.[/COLOR]
The only way fro the Bulls to try to win some games is quite simple:[/B]
[B]Locate Pippen as the PG for Most of the Game and Kukoc at the SF for Most of the game. This way with Kukoc and Pippen both in you would have more Scoring Possibilites but then again with [U]No Pippen in the SF spot = you would have a WEAKER DEFENSE for the Likes of Bird-McHale-Parish and Walton[/U] ([COLOR="DarkGreen"]Yes the Celtics Strenght = Frontline Offense and Defense[/COLOR]!).
[U]If you put Harper in for Pippen as a PG and Pippen as the SF for Most of the Game you will [/U]
[COLOR="Blue"]1st- Loose Creative Possibilities to make the Frontline Offense Score and
2nd- Consume Pippen. Whom cannot asoume the role of trying to:
1st: Try to Stop: Larry Bird!
2nd: Become the Second Scoring Threat after Jordan,
3rd: Rebound over Bird-McHale-Parish-Walton and
4th: Create as a Point-Forward.
= Simply To much Load for Pip.[/COLOR]
[U]Matchups[/U]
[U][COLOR="Blue"]Backcourt:[/COLOR][/U]
[COLOR="Red"][U]Jordan vs Ainge/DJ[/U]: Jordan Would Own Danny Ainge Offensively but still would not prevent him from Scoring Outside Shots.
(JORDAN WINS!) [/COLOR]
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Harper vs Ainge: Both will go at it with Harper having the edge in his Drives but then again this is Prime Ainge and Old Harper
(Ballanced Match Up)[/COLOR]
[U][COLOR="Blue"]Frontline[/COLOR][/U]
[COLOR="DarkGreen"][U]McHale vs Rodman[/U] : Rodman Would get Owned by a 1986 McHale Offensively and Defensively. Rodman will only Outrebound McHale but would Not Stop Him from Scoring Nor Score on Him.
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=mchalke01&p2=rodmade01[/url]
Mchale: 22.5 PPG (57.9% FG), 8.8 RPG; 1.5 BPG vs Rodman.
This is counting stats from 1990-91 to 1992-93 = A 33 to 35 year old Mchale not a [U]Prime 1985-86 McHale at age: 28! [/U]:banghead:
(McHALE WINS!)[/COLOR]
[COLOR="DarkGreen"][U]Bird vs Pippen-Kukoc[/U]. Bird would own both of them Offensively and Rebounding Wise. None will Prevent Bird from owning the Boards, Posting Up for his 12-15 Jumpers, Scoring in other ways and Making Great Passes for Parish-McHale-Walton or even spoting up DJ or Ainge for Open Shots after Pick & Rolls made by the Frontline.:confusedshrug:
Pippen will Challange Bird in the Perimeter but Bird always will do what he used to do against faster players. Just wait closer to his Frontline to assure rebounds waiting for Pippen to Shoot from the Outside, which = Pippen`s Not a Reliable Open Shooter.
Kukoc will Challange Bird in the Post but then then again Bird will have an easier time Offensively with Kukoc than with Pippen (because Pippen is obviously a better Defender).
[U]Reminder***Bird owned Pippen from 1988 to 1992[/U][/B][/COLOR]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=birdla01&p2=pippesc01[/url]
[B][COLOR="DarkGreen"]But remember this time we are talking not about a 31 to 35 year old Bird but a [U]Prime 23 to 29 year old Bird. And yes Before his injury in 1989 :confusedshrug: [/U]
(BIRD WINS!)
[U]Parish vs Bulls Center[/U]: Any Bull`s Center would get Owned by a 1986 Parish both Offensively and Defensively.
(PARISH WINS!)
Then agin if Rodman needs a Pounding, The Celtics will just put in Walton for a Twin Tower System with Parish and McHale, putting Bird as a SG for some minutes and then later put in 6`11 ft and 250 lbs Greg Kite = A Dennis Rodman like type agressive Paint Player that was famous for brawls. Not to mention the guy was a 9.3 R.P/36 Minutes. [/COLOR]
[U]RESUME OF THE LAWS: [/U]
"[U]A Great Frontline (Composed of 3 Players) Will Always Own a Good/Great Backcourt (Composed of 2 Players) [/U]" .:hammerhead:[/B]
[U]Examples:[/U]
[B][COLOR="Blue"]2008 Finals Lakers v.s Celtics Result = Same would happen to the 95-96 Bulls if they faced a 1985-86 Celtics[/COLOR][/B]
[B]* [U]In the Case of the Bulls. The Bulls can only assure one spot in the Game Matchups of [COLOR="Blue"]Total Ownership by Jordan[/COLOR] = that is [COLOR="Red"]Jordan vs Ainge/DJ[/COLOR][/U].
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Harper vs Ainge is a Ballanced Won.[/COLOR]
The Rest of the Matchups:
Bird vs Pippen: [COLOR="DarkGreen"]Bird Wins[/COLOR]
McHale vs Rodman: [COLOR="darkgreen"]Mchale Wins[/COLOR]
Parish vs Bulls Center=[COLOR="DarkGreen"] Parish[/COLOR] [COLOR="Blue"]Total Ownership![/COLOR][/B]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
[B][SIZE="4"]The 1995-96 Bulls Have "Very Little Chances" of Beating a 1984-85/1986-87 Lakers and
Pretty Much "No Chance" in Beating a 1985-86 Celtics (Greatest Team Ever) :confusedshrug: [/SIZE][/B][/QUOTE]
Well gee thanks professor.
Problem with all your formulas is real basketball doesn't work like that. Maybe in a video game, but not in real life.
The Lakers/Celtics would not be able to run their offense in the same way versus the Bulls defense. You're not going to run n' gun fast break versus that Bulls team.
They had problems versus the Bad Boy Pistons as is and the Bulls developed into an even better defensive and offensive team. If you think it would be some kind of rout you would woefully mistaken, just like all the people who picked the Lakers to beat the Celtics because their roster looked sexier on paper going in to that series (or again Lakers-Detroit in 2004).
[QUOTE=Soundwave]Well gee thanks professor.
Problem with all your formulas is real basketball doesn't work like that. Maybe in a video game, but not in real life.
The Lakers/Celtics would not be able to run their offense in the same way versus the Bulls defense. You're not going to run n' gun fast break versus that Bulls team.
They had problems versus the Bad Boy Pistons as is and the Bulls developed into an even better defensive and offensive team. If you think it would be some kind of rout you would woefully mistaken, just like all the people who picked the Lakers to beat the Celtics because their roster looked sexier on paper going in to that series (or again Lakers-Detroit in 2004).[/QUOTE]
The Celtics Front Court would rape that weak bulls front court.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]The Celtics Front Court would rape that weak bulls front court.[/QUOTE]
You mean the same way the Celtics Front Court "raped" the Bad Boys Pistons front court? See on paper that's what should happen ... in reality we know that it didn't.
It's not like the Pistons front court was an All-Star team either.
This maybe taboo to say, but **** it, even a 4th year Shaquille O' Neal was a tougher cover than anyone the Celtics had on their front court in '86.