Jordan's help. Wow.

[QUOTE=3ball]Nope - I'm referring to the 1994 Bulls, who were a 2nd Round team in 1994 (that almost got swept if not for [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7SbG-8Bvgk&t=0m10s]Kukoc's walk-off miracle[/url]).

3-peat chemistry will get ANY team to the 2nd Round with marginal talent - and that's exactly what happened in 1994.

[I]Furthermore, the Bulls weren't going to rebound from their 2nd Round defeat and do better the next year - they were a 2nd Round team PERMANENTLY without Jordan, after being a 3-peat dynasty with him.
[/I]
Obviously, the gap between permanent 2nd Round team and 3-peat dynasty is utterly massive.[/QUOTE]
They are a first round team imo. If the cavs were healthy they wouldn't of even made it that far.

[QUOTE=juju151111]Huh he averged 30 pppg on 53%. What in the actual **** are you talking about? Are you saying because his ppg dropped by 2, but stayed at the same efficiency 53% he had a bad series.:roll:

Wilt scoring plummeted. It didn't go down 1-3 ppg bro. It was way more. Wilt Choked with HCA many times and idc about your list of excuses[/QUOTE]

Jordan's numbers dropped CONSIDERABLY against the PRIME Bad Boys from '88 thru '90. And were a slight decline against a shell of what they had been in '91.

And had a prime Wilt feasted on losing teams in the first round, and average teams in the second round, like so many of the GOATs did after the 60's, his numbers would have been DRAMATICALLY higher (his scoring...after all, his rebounding was off-the-charts in the post-season, and his FG% efficiency was actually higher in his six Finals.)

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]His scoring and efficiency declined against the prime Bad Boys from '88 thru '90. In '91, he finally had a normal efficiency, but again, his scoring declined ..albeit, slightly.[/QUOTE]

You don't know what you are talking about. I know it's foolish to expect anyone on ISH to admit it, but you don't know what you are talking about.

You looked at some numbers and fed it into your overall agenda but whatever numbers you looked at lied to you. MJ DOMINATED the Pistons in 1991. He didn't average 40 against them because he didn't have to. Games 3 and 4 are two of the best games you'll never see rerun on NBA TV.

And where are you getting your numbers from anyway? You're not even watching basketball-reference.com

Here are MJ's numbers against the Pistons from 88-91

1988: 27.4, 8.8, 4.6, 2.0, 0.6 49%
1989: 29.4, 5.5, 6.5, 2.0, 0.5 46%
1990: 32.1, 7.1, 6.3, 2.1, 0.6 47%
1991: 29.8, 5.3, 7.0, 2.3, 1.8 54%

Where did his scoring decline? It consistently went UP from 88 - 90. And his efficiency is about what you'd expect against a great defense team when you have to score more. 27.4 on 49% is not better than 29.4 on 46% because it's harder to score a full 2 more points per game and maintain the same efficiency. I would argue 1990's 32.1 on 47% is better than any year outside 1991. That's a full 5 ppg higher than 1988's scoring avg and it was done in a longer series (7 vs 5).

[QUOTE=juju151111]Huh he averged 30 pppg on 53%. What in the actual **** are you talking about? Are you saying because his ppg dropped by 2, but stayed at the same efficiency 53% he had a bad series.:roll:

Wilt scoring plummeted. It didn't go down 1-3 ppg bro. It was way more. Wilt Choked with HCA many times and idc about your list of excuses[/QUOTE]

How about this...

[QUOTE]Psileas actually pointed this fact out long ago, but it is certainly worth repeating...

had Wilt been fortunate enough to have faced the Lakers in the post-season, from '60 thru '68, and he likely would own many playoff (or perhaps Finals) scoring records. And we are not talking about one or two "small samples" either, but rather, his entire H2H play against LA (and Minny) from '60 thru '68...and in seasons of between 7 to 12 H2H games.

Keep in mind that Russell WAS fortunate enough to have faced the Lakers FIVE times in the post-season in that span (actually six, but in the last one, he faced Wilt, and as expected, did absolutely nothing offensively), and it was against LA in which he elevated his playoff scoring and FG%. In fact, remove the Lakers from his post-seasons, and his offensive production would have dropped considerably.

Here were Russell's numbers against LA in those five series:

'62:

Russell averaged 18.9 ppg on a .457 FG% in his regular season against the NBA.

Against LA in the Finals: 22.9 ppg on a .543 FG%. Which included a game seven of 30 points and 40 rebounds.

BTW, against Wilt in the '62 EDF's: 22.0 ppg on a .399 FG%


'63:

Russell averaged 16.8 ppg on a .432 FG% in his regular season.

Against LA in the Finals: 20 ppg on a .467 FG%


'65:

Russell averaged 14.1 ppg on a .438 FG% against the NBA.

Against LA in the Finals: 17.8 ppg on a .702 FG% (yes, .702.)

BTW, against Wilt in the EDF's: 15.6 ppg on a .447 FG%


'66:

Russell averaged 12.9 ppg on a .415 FG% against the NBA.

Against LA in the Finals: 23.6 ppg on a .538 FG%

BTW, against Wilt in the EDF's: 14.0 ppg on a .423 FG%


'68:

Russell averaged 12.5 ppg on a .425 FG% against the NBA

Against LA in the Finals: 17.3 ppg on a .430 FG%

BTW, against Wilt in the EDF's: 13.7 ppg on a .440 FG%


Oh, and here were Russell's stats in the '69 Finals against Wilt:

Regular season against the NBA: 9.9 ppg on a .433 FG%

Against Wilt in the Finals: 9.0 ppg on a .397 FG%[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]Again, had Wilt faced the Lakers in any of his nine seasons in the league from '60 thru '68, and he likely would own at least some, (if not a vast majority), playoff and perhaps Finals, scoring records (and perhaps FG% records, as well, since Russell shot .702 against LA in '65.)

And once again, in Wilt's regular seasons, he was facing LA between 7 to 12 games in each season, with an average of about 10.

Also keep in mind that the Lakers were in the Western Conference, and Wilt only had two seasons in the Western Conference from '60 thru '68, and in one of those, his team was so bad, that he didn't make the playoffs, despite a 44.8 ppg season on .528 shooting.


Ok, here we go:

'59-60:

Against the entire NBA that season: 37.6 ppg on a .461 FG%

Against the Lakers in 9 H2H's: 36.8 ppg on a .430 FG%

High games of 41, 41, 41, 45, and 52.


'60-61:

Against the entire NBA: 38.4 ppg on a .509 FG%

Against the Lakers in 10 H2H's: 40.1 ppg on a .506 FG%

High games were 41, 41, 43, 44, 46, and 56 points.


'61-62:

Against the entire NBA: 50.4 ppg on a .506 FG%

Against LA in 9 H2H games: 51.6 ppg on a .503 FG%

High games of 48, 56, 57, 60, 60, and 78 (with 43 rebounds.)


'62-63: Against the entire NBA: 44.8 ppg on a .528 FG%

Against LA in 12 H2Hs: 48.6 ppg on a .541 FG%

High games of 40, 40, 42, 53, 63, and 72 points.


'63-64: Against the entire NBA: 36.9 ppg on a .524 FG%

Against LA in 12 H2Hs: 44.3 ppg on a .484 FG%

High games of 40, 41, 47, 49, 50, 55, and 59 points.


'64-65: Against the entire NBA: 34.7 ppg on a .510 FG%

Against LA in 8 H2Hs: 29.9 ppg on a .476 FG%

High games of 40, 40, and 41 points.


'65-66: Against the entire NBA: 33.5 ppg on a .540 FG%

Against LA in 10 H2Hs: 40.8 ppg on a .559 FG%

High games of 42, 49, 53, and 65 points.


'66-67: Against the entire NBA: 24.1 ppg on a .683 FG%

Against LA in 9 H2Hs: 26.4 ppg on a .759 FG%

High games of 32, 37, and 39 points.


'67-68: Against the entire NBA: 24.3 ppg on a .595 FG%

Against LA in 7 H2Hs: 28.1 ppg on a .638 FG%

High games of 31, 32, 35, and 53 points.


Overall, in those 86 games:

40 Point Games: 42

50 Point Games: 19

60 Point Games: 7

70 Point Games: 2

High game of 78 points.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=game3524]This all you can do when it comes to MJ stans.[/QUOTE]

Exactly :D .

[QUOTE=Da_Realist]You don't know what you are talking about. I know it's foolish to expect anyone on ISH to admit it, but you don't know what you are talking about.

You looked at some numbers and fed it into your overall agenda but whatever numbers you looked at lied to you. MJ DOMINATED the Pistons in 1991. He didn't average 40 against them because he didn't have to. Games 3 and 4 are two of the best games you'll never see rerun on NBA TV.

And where are you getting your numbers from anyway? You're not even watching basketball-reference.com

Here are MJ's numbers against the Pistons from 88-91

1988: 27.4, 8.8, 4.6, 2.0, 0.6 49%
1989: 29.4, 5.5, 6.5, 2.0, 0.5 46%
1990: 32.1, 7.1, 6.3, 2.1, 0.6 47%
1991: 29.8, 5.3, 7.0, 2.3, 1.8 54%

Where did his scoring decline? It consistently went UP from 88 - 90. And his efficiency is about what you'd expect against a great defense team when you have to score more. 27.4 on 49% is not better than 29.4 on 46% because it's harder to score a full 2 more points per game and maintain the same efficiency. I would argue 1990's 32.1 on 47% is better than any year outside 1991. That's a full 5 ppg higher than 1988's scoring avg and it was done in a longer series (7 vs 5).[/QUOTE]

Now post Jordan's regular season numbers against the NBA.

In fact, I will do it for you.

'88: 35.0 ppg on a .535 FG%.
'89: 32.5 ppg on a .538 FG%.
'90: 33.6 ppg on a .526 FG%.

'91: 31.5 ppg on a .535.

I agreed basically agreed with you in '91. BUT, that was a rapidly declining Piston team, and not the PRIME Bad Boys from '88 thru '90.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]Now post Jordan's regular season numbers against the NBA.

In fact, I will do it for you.

'88: 35.0 ppg on a .535 FG%.
'89: 32.5 ppg on a .538 FG%.
'90: 33.6 ppg on a .526 FG%.

'91: 31.5 ppg on a .535.

I agreed basically agreed with you in '91. BUT, that was a rapidly declining Piston team, and not the PRIME Bad Boys from '88 thru '90.[/QUOTE]

WHA? :biggums:

Is it that hard to admit you were talking out your ass? Or at least do what most do and disappear until another point can be argued? Now you're talking about his averages in the regular season against the rest of the NBA???

It's not hard. "I WAS TALKING OUT OF MY ASS AND I DIDN'T EVEN DO MYSELF THE COURTESY OF WATCHING BR.COM LIKE I USUALLY DO. Even when I was called out on it, I chose not to actually look up the numbers to back up what I said."

Not hard.

Btw, his numbers were GREAT against the best defensive team in the NBA (and world champions) in a seven game series where he has to adjust to their game plan every other day. :facepalm

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]Jordan's numbers dropped CONSIDERABLY against the PRIME Bad Boys from '88 thru '90. And were a slight decline against a shell of what they had been in '91.

And had a prime Wilt feasted on losing teams in the first round, and average teams in the second round, like so many of the GOATs did after the 60's, his numbers would have been DRAMATICALLY higher (his scoring...after all, his rebounding was off-the-charts in the post-season, and his FG% efficiency was actually higher in his six Finals.)[/QUOTE]
They were not decline in 91. They made it to the ecf and wasn't no shell. They were in their 20s still. They were injured before the season end and came back. The bulls just got better. They couldn't bully Pippen soft ass anymore. Lol Wilt scoring plummeted and he choked away homecourt advantage. Mj dropped 50 points twice on bad boys and they had to make their rules to stop him. He averged 30 ppg against them in the Postseason

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]I agreed basically agreed with you in '91. BUT, that was a rapidly declining Piston team, and not the PRIME Bad Boys from '88 thru '90.[/QUOTE]

Four questions...

[B]1. Who was more at a disadvantage, the 83 Lakers against the Sixers or the 91 Pistons against the Bulls?[/B] ([url]http://articles.latimes.com/1987-06-06/sports/sp-4964_1_pat-riley[/url])

[I]Item: Laker forward James Worthy, in the last week of the regular season in '83, broke his left shinbone and missed the playoffs.

Item: Laker guard Norm Nixon separated his left shoulder in the first game of the finals.

Item: Laker forward Bob McAdoo tore a hamstring in the sixth and deciding game of the Western Conference championship series against San Antonio and was severely handicapped by it in the finals.[/I]


[B]2. Who was more at a disadvantage, the 87 Celtics against the Lakers or the 91 Pistons against the Bulls?[/B] ([url]http://boston.sportsthenandnow.com/2011/06/09/the-guts-and-spirit-of-the-1987-celtics/[/url])

[I]The Celtics were entering this decisive point of the season beat up. Bill Walton, whose play backing up Robert Parish had been so vital to the ’86 title run, had been injured most of the year. Kevin McHale and Robert Parish were both battling serious foot injuries, and it would be almost painful to watch them suit up each game as the postseason progressed and wondering how they could move and pivot without excruciating pain. Danny Ainge was also fighting nagging injuries. The bench was weak, so there was little help for the injured and Larry Bird and Dennis Johnson, the two healthy starters had more of a burden placed on them.[/I]

[B]3. Who was more at a disadvantage, 89 Lakers against the Pistons or the 91 Pistons against the Bulls?[/B] ([url]http://www.realclearsports.com/lists/devastating_playoff_injuries/magic_johnson.html?state=stop[/url])

[I]They swept Portland, Seattle and then the upstart Suns in the conference finals, going an unprecedented 11-0 to reach their third straight NBA Finals.

Disaster, however, struck before they even played their first game in the Palace of Auburn Hills in a Finals rematch against the Detroit Pistons. Byron Scott severely pulled his hamstring during practice before Game 1 and would be out of the Finals. The short-handed Lakers lost their first playoff game in the series opener, but seemed to have regained their footing in Game 2, taking a double-digit lead late in the third quarter.

This was when the curtains fell on the Lakers dynasty and their Three-peat dreams. Magic Johnson, the reigning league MVP, also pulled his hamstring in the closing minutes of the period and had to leave the game.[/I]

[B]4. What makes the 91 Pistons a less worthy opponent than these other guys?[/B]

[QUOTE=Da_Realist]WHA? :biggums:

Is it that hard to admit you were talking out your ass? Or at least do what most do and disappear until another point can be argued? Now you're talking about his averages in the regular season against the rest of the NBA???

It's not hard. "I WAS TALKING OUT OF MY ASS AND I DIDN'T EVEN DO MYSELF THE COURTESY OF WATCHING BR.COM LIKE I USUALLY DO. Even when I was called out on it, I chose not to actually look up the numbers to back up what I said."

Not hard.

Btw, his numbers were GREAT against the best defensive team in the NBA (and world champions) in a seven game series where he has to adjust to their game plan every other day. :facepalm[/QUOTE]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Let's recap shall we?

'88 Regular season: 35.0 ppg on a .535 FG%
'Against the Pistons in the playoffs: 27.4 ppg on a .491 FG%

HUGE DECLINE.

'89 Regular season: 32.5 ppg on a .538 FG%
'89 Against the Pistons in the playoffs: 29,7 ppg on a .460 FG%

SIGNIFICANT DECLINE.

'90 Regular season: 33.6 ppg on a .526 FG%
'90 Post-season against Detroit: 32.1 ppg on a .467 FG%

SIGNIFICANT DECLINE.

'91 Regular season: 31.5 ppg on a .535 FG%
'91 post-season against the crumbling Bad Boys: 29.8 ppg on a .535 FG%

A SLIGHT DECLINE.

A DECLINE in EVERY SEASON against the Bad Boys.

Now, if you are claiming that the Bad Boys were a great team, with a great defense, true. BUT, welcome to Wilt's world.

Chamberlain faced the equivalent of the '89 Bad Boys...EIGHT TIMES in his post-season career. Not only that, but Nate Thurmond held KAJ to 22,8 ppg on a .405 FG%, and then 22.8 ppg on a .428 FG% in two straight post-seasons. Wilt faced Thurmond THREE times in his post-season career. And the Reed-led Knicks FOUR TIMES. And the peak Kareem-led Bucks TWICE. And the vast majority of those H2H's came in either Wilt's first round, or second round.

[QUOTE=Da_Realist]Four questions...

[B]1. Who was more at a disadvantage, the 83 Lakers against the Sixers or the 91 Pistons against the Bulls?[/B] ([url]http://articles.latimes.com/1987-06-06/sports/sp-4964_1_pat-riley[/url])

[I]Item: Laker forward James Worthy, in the last week of the regular season in '83, broke his left shinbone and missed the playoffs.

Item: Laker guard Norm Nixon separated his left shoulder in the first game of the finals.

Item: Laker forward Bob McAdoo tore a hamstring in the sixth and deciding game of the Western Conference championship series against San Antonio and was severely handicapped by it in the finals.[/I]


[B]2. Who was more at a disadvantage, the 87 Celtics against the Lakers or the 91 Pistons against the Bulls?[/B] ([url]http://boston.sportsthenandnow.com/2011/06/09/the-guts-and-spirit-of-the-1987-celtics/[/url])

[I]The Celtics were entering this decisive point of the season beat up. Bill Walton, whose play backing up Robert Parish had been so vital to the

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]:roll: :roll: :roll:

Let's recap shall we?

'88 Regular season: 35.0 ppg on a .535 FG%
'Against the Pistons in the playoffs: 27.4 ppg on a .491 FG%

HUGE DECLINE.

'89 Regular season: 32.5 ppg on a .538 FG%
'89 Against the Pistons in the playoffs: 29,7 ppg on a .460 FG%

SIGNIFICANT DECLINE.

'90 Regular season: 33.6 ppg on a .526 FG%
'90 Post-season against Detroit: 32.1 ppg on a .467 FG%

SIGNIFICANT DECLINE.

'91 Regular season: 31.5 ppg on a .535 FG%
'91 post-season against the crumbling Bad Boys: 29.8 ppg on a .535 FG%

A SLIGHT DECLINE.

A DECLINE in EVERY SEASON against the Bad Boys.

Now, if you are claiming that the Bad Boys were a great team, with a great defense, true. BUT, welcome to Wilt's world.[/QUOTE]

I wish we had a "shifting goalposts" icon. You just argue just to argue.

[QUOTE=Da_Realist]I wish we had a "shifting goalposts" icon. You just argue just to argue.[/QUOTE]

My original post, which you laughably took exception to:

[QUOTE]Jordan's numbers dropped CONSIDERABLY against the PRIME Bad Boys from '88 thru '90. And were a slight decline against a shell of what they had been in '91.[/QUOTE]

And my point:

[QUOTE]Let's recap shall we?

'88 Regular season: 35.0 ppg on a .535 FG%
'Against the Pistons in the playoffs: 27.4 ppg on a .491 FG%

HUGE DECLINE.

'89 Regular season: 32.5 ppg on a .538 FG%
'89 Against the Pistons in the playoffs: 29,7 ppg on a .460 FG%

SIGNIFICANT DECLINE.

'90 Regular season: 33.6 ppg on a .526 FG%
'90 Post-season against Detroit: 32.1 ppg on a .467 FG%

SIGNIFICANT DECLINE.

'91 Regular season: 31.5 ppg on a .535 FG%
'91 post-season against the crumbling Bad Boys: 29.8 ppg on a .535 FG%

A SLIGHT DECLINE.

A DECLINE in EVERY SEASON against the Bad Boys.[/QUOTE]

100% CORRECT ASSERTION.

Next...

[QUOTE=juju151111]They were not decline in 91. They made it to the ecf and wasn't no shell. They were in their 20s still. They were injured before the season end and came back. The bulls just got better. They couldn't bully Pippen soft ass anymore. Lol Wilt scoring plummeted and he choked away homecourt advantage. Mj dropped 50 points twice on bad boys and they had to make their rules to stop him. He averged 30 ppg against them in the Postseason[/QUOTE]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

The NBA ROUTINELY created RULES to prevent Chamberlain's dominance. There is NO comparison to the "rules" that were created to HELP MJ, while the many that were designed to STOP Chamberlain.

And Wilt dropped 50 points THREE TIMES in MUST WIN PLAYOFF games. As well as several games of 40+ against Russell (with must win games of 46 and 50 BTW.) Give me a list of MJ's "must win" 50+ point games.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]My original post, which you laughably took exception to:



And my point:



100% CORRECT ASSERTION.

Next...[/QUOTE]

Nah... I actually gave you more credit than you deserved. I assumed you couldn't possibly be comparing MJ's numbers in a highly intense rivalry seven game playoff series against the best defensive team in the league with his numbers against the field in a long regular season where no one truly cared until at least April. Not even you.

But I was wrong.