great Scottie Pippen interview about 1995-1996 Chicago Bulls

[QUOTE=Soundwave][B]You mean the same way the Celtics Front Court "raped" the Bad Boys Pistons front court?[/B] 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.[/QUOTE]
Bill Walton wasn't playing for Boston when they played the Pistons in '87 and '88.

And Kevin McHale was dominating the Bad Boys Pistons frontcourt from '87 - '88.

[B]Kevin McHale vs Bad Boys Pistons[/B]
[U]'87 Season[/U]
1. 37 Points...12 Rebounds...60 FG%
2. 38 Points....14 Rebounds... 71 FG%
3. 22 Points...10 Rebounds... 50 FG%
4. 25 Points...10 Rebounds... 50 FG%

[U]'88 Season[/U]
1. 20 Points...9 Rebounds...67 FG%
2. 31 Points...7 Rebounds...69 FG%
3. 20 Points...3 Rebounds....53 FG%
4. 33 Points...11 Rebounds...62 FG%
5. 29 Points...11 Rebounds...63 FG%
6. 33 Points..7 Rebounds...87 FG%

Besides..The Pistons Frontcourt was better than the Bulls Front Court.

Laimbeer, Mahorn, Rodman >>>>>> Longley, Wennington, Rodman

[QUOTE=Soundwave]Bulls in six over both the Celtics and Lakers.

[B]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. [/B]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]

This tells me how little you know about the '86 Celtics. The 1986 Celtics had one of the greatest if not the greatest Half Court Offense in History. In no way did they depend on their fast break offense to win games.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]This tells me how little you know about the '86 Celtics. The 1986 Celtics had one of the greatest if not the greatest Half Court Offense in History. In no way did they depend on their fast break offense to win games.[/QUOTE]

The way I look at it, the Bad Boy Pistons played the Lakers/Celtics pretty close to even and eventually became better than them.

I place the 95-96 Bulls above the Bad Boy Pistons.

Besides, when people say "oh Chicago wasn't as talented" .... well that Bulls team was built in the expansion era where one team really couldn't stockpile that much talent.

If that same Bulls core had access to better role players available in pre-expansion 80s, they would wipe the floor with the Celtics or Lakers.

[QUOTE=Soundwave]The way I look at it, the Bad Boy Pistons played the Lakers/Celtics pretty close to even and eventually became better than them.

I place the 95-96 Bulls above the Bad Boy Pistons.[/QUOTE]
We are not talking about the '87 or '88 Celtics we are talking about the '86 Celtics. And during the '86 season the Pistons didn't cause much problems for the Celtics...the Celtics were 4-1 vs Detroit that year. Celtics were a different team by '88. Bill Walton and Scott Wedman were gone. And Dennis Johnson and Robert Parish aged.

[QUOTE=Soundwave]If that same Bulls core had access to better role players available in pre-expansion 80s, they would wipe the floor with the Celtics or Lakers.[/QUOTE]
Key word: [B]IF[/B]

Lets play Sir Charles' game here and really break down the Celtics competition in the 86 playoffs.

In the first round they played the Bulls who they swept. The Bulls were pretty much Michael Jordan and a bunch of scrubs coached by Stan Albeck. Yet Jordan managed to get by this "great Boston front line" consistently and averaged 43 pts a game for the series with one of those games going to double OT. But you're gonna tell me that a prime Jordan along with Pippen and Rodman coached by Phil Jackson would have as you say NO CHANCE against this Boston team. You can't be serious.

This great Boston team couldn't stop Jordan at all that series. And what your match ups fail to account for is that Jordan is gonna be double sometimes even triple teamed. The Celtics did it to him and 86 and they couldn't stop him. Imagine him with a Kerr or Kukoc to kick it out to out of the double team. I think Kerr has proved that he can hit clutch shots in the playoffs Oh but thats right, according to you the Bulls would have "no chance". How ****ing ignorant.

But wait I'm not done. Who did the Celtics play in the 2nd round? The Atlanta Hawks. Theres an eastern conference power for you. They never got past the 2nd round of the playoffs and their peak was taking the Celtics to 7 games in 1988. You really gonna try and tell me that the 86 Hawks were better or even on par with the 91 Pistons, 93 Knicks, or 96 Magic just to name a few.

Now were at the Eastern Conference Finals. Who were the Celtics opponents for the east crown? The Immortal Milwaukee Bucks. Theres a perennial eastern power for you. Led in scoring that year by the great Sidney Moncrief. Of course the Celtics walked all over them. But not cause they were an inferior opponent. These are the 80's were talking about. You would of had to of been one kick ass team on the verge of greatness to make all the way to the east finals to challenge the 86' Celtics. Right?

By the way before we get to the Finals, lets review who the starting centers were for these 3 teams. Alton Lister, Jon Koncak and wait for it...... Dave Corzine. However did I think that Ewing and Shaq could hold a candle to these guys.:confusedshrug:

Now to the Finals where the Celtics beat the Houston Rockets in 6 games. Rockets were a good team mind you. No joke there. But their comptition was the Reggie Theus led Kings and legendary Denver Nuggets before punking the defending champion Lakers in 5 games. (Wonder what the Laker fans excuse is for that). But lets be real here even though the Rockets were a good team, they were satisfied just to get to the Finals much like the Lebron led Cavs were against the Spurs. No one gave these Rockets a chance at the time, but it took the Celtics 6 games to put them away for the title.
[B]
YOU GONNA TELL ME THAT THE 96 BULLS DON'T STAND A BETTER CHANCE OF BEATING THE CELTICS THAN THE 86 ROCKETS?!?!?!?!?![/B]

A Rockets team mind you that followed up their Finals run by going out in the 2nd and first round respectively over the next 2 seasons. The 96 Bulls only followed their Finals win with 2 more titles including a 69 win season.

But thats right, all thats diluted cause the Bulls never had to get by the 86 Bucks.

:banghead:

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]Bill Walton wasn't playing for Boston when they played the Pistons in '87 and '88.

And Kevin McHale was dominating the Bad Boys Pistons frontcourt from '87 - '88.

[B]Kevin McHale vs Bad Boys Pistons[/B]
[U]'87 Season[/U]
1. 37 Points...12 Rebounds...60 FG%
2. 38 Points....14 Rebounds... 71 FG%
3. 22 Points...10 Rebounds... 50 FG%
4. 25 Points...10 Rebounds... 50 FG%

[U]'88 Season[/U]
1. 20 Points...9 Rebounds...67 FG%
2. 31 Points...7 Rebounds...69 FG%
3. 20 Points...3 Rebounds....53 FG%
4. 33 Points...11 Rebounds...62 FG%
5. 29 Points...11 Rebounds...63 FG%
6. 33 Points..7 Rebounds...87 FG%

Besides..The Pistons Frontcourt was better than the Bulls Front Court.

Laimbeer, Mahorn, Rodman >>>>>> Longley, Wennington, Rodman[/QUOTE]

[B]Somebody that knows Basketball :applause: [/B]

[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]Somebody that knows Basketball :applause: [/B][/QUOTE]

Except for the fact that the Bulls front court was Longley, [B]Pippen[/B] and Rodman. Little bit of a difference there.

He also left out the fact that despite those numbers put up by McHale, the Celtics lost in 88.

And lets break down those front lines a little bit more.

Pistons:

Lambier- no individual awards

Mahorn - no individual awards

Rodman - made his first NBA all defensive first team in 88.

We are just talking 87-88 here when it comes to the Pistons right?

Now the 96 Bulls:

Longley - No individual awards

Pippen - NBA All defensive first team (His 6th by 96), All NBA First team (His 5th by 96)

Rodman - NBA All defensive first team (his 8th by 96), Rebounding leader for the 5th straight year by 96.

Oh but you guys are right. The Pistons front line was better cause you say so.:rolleyes:

[QUOTE=puppychili]Except for the fact that the Bulls front court was Longley, [B]Pippen[/B] and Rodman. Little bit of a difference there.

He also left out the fact that despite those numbers put up by McHale, the Celtics lost in 88.[/QUOTE]

Well, if you are going to add Pippen then I would add Dantley and Salley as well.:D

[QUOTE=puppychili]And lets break down those front lines a little bit more.

Pistons:

Lambier- no individual awards

Mahorn - no individual awards

Rodman - made his first NBA all defensive first team in 88.

We are just talking 87-88 here when it comes to the Pistons right?

Now the 96 Bulls:

Longley - No individual awards

Pippen - NBA All defensive first team (His 6th by 96), All NBA First team (His 5th by 96)

Rodman - NBA All defensive first team (his 8th by 96), Rebounding leader for the 5th straight year by 96.

Oh but you guys are right. The Pistons front line was better cause you say so.:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

I'm sorry but the Bulls only had 2 quality players in Pippen and Rodman. Longley and Wennington were total scrubs.

'96 Pippen & Rodman > '88 Dantley and Rodman (small advantage)

'88 Laimbeer, Salley & Mahorn >>>>>> Longley and Wennington (HUGE advantage)

There is no doubt the Pistons had the better frontcourt.

[QUOTE=puppychili]Except for the fact that the Bulls front court was Longley, [B]Pippen[/B] and Rodman. Little bit of a difference there.

He also left out the fact that despite those numbers put up by McHale, the Celtics lost in 88.[/QUOTE]

[B]You also left out the fact that a 1986 Mchale would not be 31 years old like in 1988 [U]but a 28 years old Mchale = That is Right On His Prime and would school Rodman even more [/U]:) and the fact that Bird from 1987 to 1992 schooled Scottie Pippen (even at ages 31 to 35 with no back) [U]but a 1986 Larry Bird would be 29 yeards old = That is Right On His Prime again and "before his back injury" of 1989, would School Even More [/U] :) . :confusedshrug:

Then again a 32 year old Parish would destroy Longley Offensively and Defensively :)

Only Jordan would Dominate Offensively [U]but you must also remember this is no longer a Jordan in his 20s with No Longer The Same Athleticism and Leaping ability[/U] but Jordan [U]who relied more on Post Up and Outside Jumper.[/U]

= [COLOR="DarkGreen"]This will favor the Celtics becase they loved the Post Up Slow Paced Game.:)[/COLOR]

Jordan would not dominate like in 1986 driving to the basket but still would dominate the Score Board with high 30s and 40s and also prevent Ainge from Scoring Higher Numbers [U]but one must remember that 1986 Ainge was also in his Prime at 26 years old and that same day in 1986 when MJ scored 63 points against the Celtics ainge also scored 24 points[/U]. Danny Ainge was no easy task : One of the Set Shooters (not to mention a Good Passer) and One of the Best Role Players Ever. He had the Fundamentals to create for others too.

Harper vs DJ would not be as easy task as many think because DJ had smarts and would make the game flow in Slow Pace/Half Court Game which he was good at while using his butt and body to push his opponent. Ofcourse Harper would have the advantage of driving to the basket but there is very little chance he would have a comfortable shot when facing Parish-McHale-Walton-Kite or Bird. Harper would have to rely on his Outside Jumper.

And finally....

If the Celtics just want to tire off Rodman and Pippen in the Pant they can just switch for some minutes and play with a Two Center Piece/Twin Tower System with Walton as CF, Parish as C and McHale as PF...leaving Bird as SG/PG and Ainge as Pure PG.

This would tire of Rodman and Pippen for Rebounds and inmedietly give out some Important Fouls for the Celtics Frontline in Parish, McHale, Walton and sometimes Bird (as he drives through pick and rolls on to the basket). Lets also rembmer that Parish-McHale and Walton are not bad FT% Shooters :)

So here is how ti Goes:

[U]Parish (32 yr) vs Longley (27 yr) [/U]

[COLOR="darkgreen"]Parish Owns both Defensively and Offensively > Longley[/COLOR]

[U]McHale (28 yr)/Walton (33 yr) vs Rodman (35 yr) [/U]

[COLOR="DarkGreen"]McHale Owns both Offensively and Defensively > Rodman [/COLOR]

***Rodman, would have the Edge on Rebounds until the Celtics Use the BIGGER LINE UP with Walton as CF and put in Mr Greg Kite 6`11/250 lbs for some pownding :)

[U]Bird (29 yr) vs Pippen (30 yr)/Kukoc (27 yr)[/U]

As I said before Bird would own him Scoring Wise in the Post, Away from the Post, Would Own the Rebounds and Ofcourse Assist his Whole HIGH FG% FRONTLINE (McHale-Parish-Walton) and Perimter Shooters (Ainge, Siesting and DJ)

Only way for Pippen to Score a Bit is to try to Drive but Bird was a Smart Team Defender: As i said he would Just Retreat Closer to his Frontline for Pippen to Shoot From the Outside = Pippen Not the Grreatest Of Outside Shooters.

[COLOR="darkgreen"]Bird Owns Pippen Offensively, Creativily and Rebounding Wise > Pippen[/COLOR]

[U]Jordan (32 yr) vs Ainge (26 yr)/DJ and Siesting Sometimes..[/U]

[COLOR="Red"]Jordan Owns Offensively and Defensively > Ainge[/COLOR]

[U]But....You have DJ, Bird and Walton so Mr Ainge will definetly get to Shoot from the Oustide Through Pick and Rolls and Set Jumpers[/U]

[U]Harper (32 yr) vs DJ (31 yr) /Sometimes Ainge[/U]

That is alreadly explained. Harper would have the drive advantage but would have to accomodate his shot from a 15 foot range because it would be hard for him to shoot a Comfortable Shot with Mchale-Parish-Walton and Kite in the Paint.

DJ would slown the game down to create fouls on Harper and also Spot up Ainge and Bird off Pick and Rolls or Assist for the Higher FG% Shot with McHale and Parish. Lets also mention that DJ could Shoot CLUTCH from the Outside and wasn`t a bad Driver. Not to mention Great Rebounder for his Height:)

[COLOR="DarkRed"]Harper = DJ[/COLOR]

Here is how it goes:

Celtics OWN 3 Positions
Bulls OWN 1 Position and
Have an EQUAL Match Up in 1 Position.

[COLOR="DarkGreen"]3 Celtics (Parish, McHale, Bird, Walton, *Kite)[/COLOR] > [COLOR="red"]3 Bulls (Longely, Rodman, Pippen, *Kukoc)[/COLOR]
[COLOR="Red"]1 Bull (Jordan)[/COLOR] > [COLOR="DarkGreen"]1 Celtics (Ainge)[/COLOR]
[COLOR="DarkGreen"]1 Celtic (DJ) [/COLOR]= [COLOR="Red"]1 Bull (Harper)[/COLOR]

Series will End Up Like the 2008 Finals Celtics vs Lakers [COLOR="darkgreen"]4[/COLOR]-[COLOR="DarkOrange"]2[/COLOR]

The Bulls have 3 Black Wholes in Their Line Up. The Celtics Own the Frontline (Offensively, Defensively and Rebounding Wise) and even Have an [U]EQUAL Match Up in the Frountcourt[/U] to their advantage somewhat because "Bird > Jordan in Making Others Better". Remember what happend to Bryant in the finals? Similar would happen to Jordan (ofcourse not as Much because MJ is MJ). Mj would obviously Score his High 30s and 40s, get 6-7 Rebound and 8-9 Assits... but the Rest of His Team Will Be Owned because the Celtics have 3 Clearly Superior Spots and Bird to make others Better. The Rest of the Bulls Line Up Has No :no: Chance

[COLOR="DarkGreen"]1986 Celtics[/COLOR] > [COLOR="Red"]1996 Bulls[/COLOR][/B]

[B]A Fact[/B] :confusedshrug:

Well you could also say Gasol + Odom > Garnett + Perkins

Kobe >> Pierce

Fisher > Rondo (based on experience)

How come the Finals turned into a rout for Boston?

Because L.A. could not run their offense versus Boston.

I don't think any team, not the 87 Lakers, not the 86 Celtics could just shrug off the Bulls defense that easily.

If they had trouble with the Bad Boy Pistons, they would have trouble with the Bulls.

And also while yes Longley, Wennington, etc. were "scrubs" they were effective within the Bulls system of clogging up the lane with their big bodies.

And no, the Bulls would not fold like Kobe's Lakers. The Bulls are far too smart and mentally tough to get punked out of any series like Kobe's Lakers did.

Pippen would get his 20+ too, I don't see who on the Celtics would match up with Pippen and prevent him from doing that. Pippen owned the Lakers offensively in 1991 also while dogging Magic Johnson for the series as well. It's not an either/or thing for Pippen, he could shut down or slow the other team's star and could still chip in with 18-22 a night.

[QUOTE=Soundwave]Well you could also say Gasol + Odom > Garnett + Perkins

Kobe >> Pierce

Fisher > Rondo (based on experience)

How come the Finals turned into a rout for Boston?

Because L.A. could not run their offense versus Boston.
[/QUOTE]
WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE 2008 NBA FINALS.

[QUOTE=Soundwave]If they had trouble with the Bad Boy Pistons, they would have trouble with the Bulls.[/QUOTE]
That's a dumb argument. We ARE TALKING ABOUT THE '86 CELTICS... NOT THE '88 CELTICS.

[QUOTE=Soundwave]And also while yes Longley, Wennington, etc. were "scrubs" they were effective within the Bulls system of clogging up the lane with their big bodies.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, they were scrubs. They would have no chance vs the Celtics Frontcourt. Anyone who trys to argue this should get their basketball pass revoked.

[QUOTE=Soundwave]And no, the Bulls would not fold like Kobe's Lakers. Pippen would get his 20+ too, I don't see who on the Celtics would match up with Pippen and prevent him from doing that. Pippen owned the Lakers offensively in 1991 also while dogging Magic Johnson for the series as well. It's not an either/or thing for Pippen, he could shut down or slow the other team's star and could still chip in with 18-22 a night.[/QUOTE]
And who on the Bulls would match up with Larry Bird? Sorry, even a prime Pippen can't stop him. And if you think so..you are overrating Pippen.

And I can't believe how many people beilieve Scottie shut down Magic in the '91 Finals. Magic still averaged 18.6 PPG. 8 RPG. and 12.4 APG. And it was actually Jordan NOT Pippen who guarded Magic for most of the series.

In the end the biggest weakness for the Bulls is their Centers and the lack of inside scoring from their big men. And the Celtics are the perfect team to exploit this weakness. After all the '86 Celtics did have THE GREATEST FRONT COURT IN NBA HISTORY.

[QUOTE=Soundwave]Well you could also say Gasol + Odom > Garnett + Perkins

Kobe >> Pierce

Fisher > Rondo (based on experience)

How come the Finals turned into a rout for Boston?

Because L.A. could not run their offense versus Boston.

I don't think any team, not the 87 Lakers, not the 86 Celtics could just shrug off the Bulls defense that easily.

If they had trouble with the Bad Boy Pistons, they would have trouble with the Bulls.

And also while yes Longley, Wennington, etc. were "scrubs" they were effective within the Bulls system of clogging up the lane with their big bodies.

And no, the Bulls would not fold like Kobe's Lakers. The Bulls are far too smart and mentally tough to get punked out of any series like Kobe's Lakers did.

Pippen would get his 20+ too, I don't see who on the Celtics would match up with Pippen and prevent him from doing that. Pippen owned the Lakers offensively in 1991 also while dogging Magic Johnson for the series as well. It's not an either/or thing for Pippen, he could shut down or slow the other team's star and could still chip in with 18-22 a night.[/QUOTE]

[B]Stop Dreaming please :violin: its a fact the 1986 Celtics not only has a Superior Starting Line Up than the 1996 Bulls. Not only could they exploit their Half Court Game on a Bulls Weak Frontline but even Score Great in A Fastbreak Game. Enough Proof has been given through my writings /and many other people have to.

And by the way Lamar is one of the most unintelligent unfundamental forwards I ever saw. The level of game has gone so much compared to the 90s and 80s its frightening!. The Lakers have to get a more talented Forward if they want to compete with the actual Celtics Frontline again. Not to mention a Forward that has some Offensive Skill and Shoots at a Higher FG%:confusedshrug: [/B]

Despite all those match ups you pointed out, the 86 Celtics still had to play six games to beat the 86 Rockets. You gonna tell me that the 96 Bulls aren't [B]way[/B] better than the 86 Rockets. So by that token you'd have to say that it would at least go seven. And as soundwave pointed out you can't just go by matchups on paper, because alot of times, as shown in this years Finals, the games don't always go as the match ups predict.

And I like how you guys completely ignored my post on the Celtics playoff run. Everyone wants to hate on the 96 Bulls cause the talent was so "diluted". But are you really gonna tell me that the 86 Bulls, Hawks and Bucks are really [B]that [/B]much better than the 96 Heat, Knicks and Magic. If I asked you who was better, the 86 Bucks or 96 Magic who would you pick?

Look I have no problem with someone saying that the 86 Celtics would beat the 96 Bulls. I just have a problem with how you come to that conclusion and act like it would be so easy. No team in NBA history would have an easy time with the 96 Bulls.

And I think my earlier post pretty much dispelled the romanticized notion that everyone has about the 80's being filled with all star teams as far as the eye can see.

Those Bucks teams of the 80's are one of the most underrated teams in history. You had guys like Sidney Moncrief, (one of the most underrated players in history) Terry Cummings, Ricky Pierce, Paul Pressey etc. The '86 Bucks actually won their games by an average of 9 PPG during the season.

I'm not saying those Bucks teams were bad. I'm just saying that there were more than a couple teams besides the Bulls in the 90's that would match up with the Bucks quite well if not out right beat them.

[QUOTE=puppychili]I'm not saying those Bucks teams were bad. I'm just saying that there were more than a couple teams besides the Bulls in the 90's that would match up with the Bucks quite well if not out right beat them.[/QUOTE]

But the NBA was stronger in 1986 than it was in 1996. In '86 there were 23 teams in the NBA by '96 there were 29 teams in the NBA. And there is no doubt the eastern conference was stronger in 1986 than it was in 1996. The Bulls played strong teams during the playoffs but the Celtics played much better teams during the regular season than the Bulls did. You had a great Magic team but by 1996 the Knicks and the Cavs were no longer threats like they were in the early 90's.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]Those Bucks teams of the 80's are one of the most underrated teams in history. You had guys like Sidney Moncrief, (one of the most underrated players in history) Terry Cummings, Ricky Pierce, Paul Pressey etc. The '86 Bucks actually won their games by an average of 9 PPG during the season.[/QUOTE]

There's a reason why those Bucks teams are underrated, they were a team who was never that good. They made the conference finals in '83, '84, and '86 and won a total of 1 game in 3 conference finals appearances. They also had a letdown year in '81 where they expected to challenge for the championship.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]But the NBA was stronger in 1986 than it was in 1996. In '86 there were 23 teams in the NBA by '96 there were 29 teams in the NBA. And there is no doubt the eastern conference was stronger in 1986 than it was in 1996. The Bulls played strong teams during the playoffs but the Celtics played much better teams during the regular season than the Bulls did. You had a great Magic team but by 1996 the Knicks and the Cavs were no longer threats like they were in the early 90's.[/QUOTE]

I wont deny that the NBA was stronger back then but it wasn't [B]THAT[/B] much stronger. But athletes of the 90's were better conditioned that athletes of the 80's. I would argue that there was a bigger talent pool of players in the 90's than in the 80's.

But look, I don't have a problem with people saying that the 80's were stronger than the 90's. I just have a problem with the notion that people put out there that the 80's was filled with all star teams from top to bottom and that the 90's were some kind of wasteland which is the only reason why the Bulls were so good.

[QUOTE=puppychili]Except for the fact that the Bulls front court was Longley, [B]Pippen[/B] and Rodman. Little bit of a difference there.

He also left out the fact that despite those numbers put up by McHale, the Celtics lost in 88.[/QUOTE]
they also left out that the pistons should have beat the celtics in 87

it's the first time that i kinda respect Sir Charles post,but really,what he post is kinda makes sense:applause:

i think pretty much 80% people in the world would agree MJ>Magic,Bird,but as a team 86 Celtics,87 Lakers>96 Bulls

[QUOTE=west]it's the first time that i kinda respect Sir Charles post,but really,what he post is kinda makes sense:applause:

i think pretty much 80% people in the world would agree MJ>Magic,Bird,but as a team 86 Celtics,87 Lakers>96 Bulls[/QUOTE]
no , actually, it the other way around. most polls such as espn, and nba.com have the bulls as the best team ever.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]no , actually, it the other way around. most polls such as espn, and nba.com have the bulls as the best team ever.[/QUOTE]

[B]Those people don`t know **** about Basketball.:hammerhead:

Il say it again

[COLOR="DarkGreen"]Prime 32 year Parish > Any Bulls Center
Prime 28 year McHale > 35 year old Rodman
Prime 29 year old Bird (even at ages 31 to 35 after his injury schooled) > Pippen[/COLOR]
[COLOR="Red"]Prime 26 Ainge < 32 Year Old Jordan [/COLOR]
*But Still Ainge was No Easy Task
[COLOR="DarkRed"]DJ = Harper[/COLOR]

[COLOR="DarkGreen"]Celtics Dominate 3 Positions[/COLOR], Bulls dominate 1. One Position is Equal. :confusedshrug:

"A Great Offensive and Defensive Frontline will Always Dominate a Team with a Weak Offensive Frontline and Just a Good Defensive Frontline. Especially if this team that has a Great Offensive and Defensive Frontline also has a Good Backcourt that can Score, Shoot and Pass". :)

Who has a Deeper Bench? The Celtics:confusedshrug:

Who has the Player With Superior Court Intelligence, Passing and That Can Make Others Better in Both Teams?

The Celtics = Larry Bird!!!

There is a reason way many basketball experts say the 1986 Boston Celtics is the Greatest Ever. That has been said even if the Lakers won more Championships in the 80s. :confusedshrug:

Back in the 80s there was less teams, more competition, players with more fundamentals, players that could pass and "see the game" ahead, more talent and less excessive hype for teams that had good players but NOT A GREAT TEAM.

In the 1980s People Wanted to SEE GREAT TEAMS not Just GREAT PLAYERS.

1990s = Excesive Marketing. Jordan etc...has blinded the NBA to the Point Where Everyone Wantso to Be Like Mike (even the Slogan is there) so they are inventing Stars (even Jordan says the same) In the Jordan-Way/In the Jordan-Style but they will never Reach his Level: Just like None Will Reach the Level of Bird, Magic, Charles, Hakeem because those are type of Players that Make Others Better.

This Over Hype is Even More Evident with the Real Intention of [U]Handchecking Rule[/U] = A Rule that has the following as its REAL OBJECTIVE:

"CREATE AND FORCE THE COMMING OF MORE [I]JORDAN-LIKE [/I]PERIMTER FAST-AGIL-SKILLED-LEAPING-SHOOTING PERMITER (GUARDS, ESPECIALLY) PENETRATORS.

This, along the[U] 3 Second Rule[/U] =

"TO FACILITE THE DRIVING/PENETRATING of THESE MENTIONED...

Result:

OVERHYPE of the JORDAN STYLE OF GAME and the BLINDNESS of BASKETBAL FANS OF THE WEAKER "NON TEAM" ORIENTED NBA of the 90s" .

This is one of the reasons why Stern is killing the Game (especially after all the Great 1980s Drafted Playes have finally Retired).

His inmense Profits from Jordan and MJ retired has him desperate in trying to Force the Comming of a New-Jordan like Player because people have Forgent about the 1980s Competitiveness: where a GOOD TEAM will always beat the WEAKER TEAM no matter if Jordan-Wilt or WHO EVER was playing in the other WEAKER TEAM.

Simple:

This Happened After Aging of the Lakers-Celtics-Pistons Era and has resulted in [U]DESTRUCTION of THE HAVING A "GREAT TEAM" MENTALITY [/U] do the Over Hype of the Jordan-Style of Game

Jordan Style of Game: Stern`s business of making more $$$ of Mr. Jordan even after this one has retired ..disgusting....

That is why we have so many Blind People (and Jordan fans as well) whom have a [U]Hard Time Giving Credit to Other Players that Don`t Play Jordan-Like [/U] Or Players away from the SG Spot Even...PFs, SFs, Cs...All Whom Dominate the Same (in a Different Way and Have A Different Initial Role in the Game Ofcourse) and Also Make Others Better.

That is what happend to Barkley and Hakeem (in a lesser way ofcourse) and many of there Great Players from the 1980s era.

Todays Players "Just Want to Be Like Mike"....but THEY CAN`T!

End...:violin: [/B]

Sir Charles, would you go so far as to say that there are certain [SIZE="4"][COLOR="Red"]Laws[/COLOR][/SIZE] in basketball? If so, could you school us on said laws? Thanks in advance.

[QUOTE=Loki]Sir Charles, would you go so far as to say that there are certain [SIZE="4"][COLOR="Red"]Laws[/COLOR][/SIZE] in basketball? If so, could you school us on said laws? Thanks in advance.[/QUOTE]
lol yeah charles please explain these "laws"

and i alsothink that the best lineup the bulls could play would be

pg pippen
sg jordan
sf kukoc
pf rodman
c williams

[QUOTE=97 bulls]and i alsothink that the best lineup the bulls could play would be

pg pippen
sg jordan
sf kukoc
pf rodman
c williams[/QUOTE]

[B]If You DON`T`put Pippen and Rodman in the Frontline you will facilite the Greatest Frontline of All Time`s (1986 Boston celtics) Offensive Labour because Kukoc will have a Harder Time Guarding either Mchale or Bird Than ANY other Forward in the Bull`s Squad.

Bird already prooved he could School Pippen at ages 31 to 35 and even the No Backed Bird after 1989 (but Remember this is Bird in his Most Prime) :).

With Kukoc you will have better Passing and "Maybe A Slightly Better Offensive Frontline Scoring" but what is that you Must Worrty About the Celtics?

ITS STRENGHT = "FRONTLINE OFFENSIVE"

And by using this Line Up. You will have a WEAKER FRONTLINE DEFENSE and Not to mention, A WEAKER FRONTLINE REBOUNDING CAPACITY :confusedshrug:

If I was the 1996 Bulls and faced the 1986 Celtics i would go with that Frontline at home (Chicago) "MAYBE" but not in the Boston Garden.:no:

The Bulls have the Edge in the Backcourt Composed of 2 Players (Jordan, Harper and Ofcourse Improvsing Pippen at the PG spot) but the Celtics have the Edge in the Frontline Composed of [U]3 Players[/U] (Bird-McHale-Parish and Sometimes Walton whom can also be improvised as CF).

Bulls in Boston Should Go with This Line Up for Most of the Time:

PG: Pippen
SG: Jordan
PF: Rodman
PF: John Salley
C: Longley

You need 2 PFs to Try to Stop the Celtics Frontline Defensively. Any other way is Suicide fo the Bulls :confusedshrug:

But... By Using this Line Up = You re Loosing Offensive Possibilities because You have No Pippen and No Kukoc :confusedshrug:

See? The Bulls Have a Black Whole :).

The 1986 Celtics Have an Edge in 3 Positions Clearly and If the Bulls STRENGTHEN THEIR FRONTLINE DEFENSIVELY (to try To Stop the Big 3) =

[U]THEY LOOSE OFFENSIVE CAPACITY in THEIR FRONTLINE (Not To Mention Creativity and Passing) [/U]

The 1986 Celtics would exchange Their Line Ups Constantly from

[U]Team A[/U]: More Versetaile and Offensive Oriented. Objective: "To Attack the BackCourt- Make Jorddan-Pippen and Harper Run, Spread and Work Harder"

PG: DJ
SG: AINGE
SF: BIRD
PF: McHALE
C: PARISH

[U]Team B[/U]: More Defensive Oriented. Objective: "Destroy the Bull`s Weak Frontline":)

PG: DJ/Ainge
F-G: BIRD (would Play like a Combo Guard From The Edges but Will Force the Post Up Game Through Pick and Rolls Set By Great Passing CF Bill Walton)
PF: McHALE
CF: WALTON/KITE (Objetive: Tire Down Rodman and Salley :pimp: )
C: PARISH

Bulls have no Chance :violin: Celtics 4-2 at most[/B]

"Excessive marketing" in the 80s is BS.

The Lakers/Celtics played in an era with several fewer teams, so the talent around the NBA was less spread out.

If you put a Jordan-Pippen-Rodman core in that era they'd have a better supporting cast because the league wasn't as watered down.

But that's not Jordan-Pippen-Rodman's fault.

Also Rodman at 35 was still as athletic, energetic as most players are at age 25. Guy was built like a rock. He was playing incredible basketball at that time.

For me to believe the Celtics/Lakers could rout the Bulls -- they'd have to have done the same to the 80s Pistons ... which they couldn't do. 90s Bulls > Pistons, the Celtics/Lakers would have an even harder time against the Bulls IMO.

Also then it's fair to ask -- how many titles would Jordan have won with the benefit of the supporting cast Magic or Bird had? 7? 8? 9? 10?

Excessive marketing" in the 80s is BS.

[B]Excesve Marketing in the 90s. 80s Was B-Ball Fan Oriented. [/B]

The Lakers/Celtics played in an era with several fewer teams, so the talent around the NBA was less spread out.

:no:

[B]Less Spread Out = Chance of More than 1 Good/Great Player To End Up Playing in the Same Team of Another Good/Great Player :)

Fewer Teams = Better Player Selection. More Quantity Average Players Sent to the ABA of Weaker Leagues. Bye Bye to Bad Players :)...[/B]

If you put a Jordan-Pippen-Rodman core in that era they'd have a better supporting cast because the league wasn't as watered down.

[B]We are talking about the 1995-96 Bulls and the 1985-86 Celtics. No the What Ifs :no:

I could also say What If Bird played with Kareem and Magic as a Core of a Team or if Barkley played with his Ideal Style of A Running Offense Team Lead by a Great Passing PG or with the Lakers. Imagine Worthy as SF, Charles as PF and Kareem in the Frontline?[/B]

But that's not Jordan-Pippen-Rodman's fault.

Also Rodman at 35 was still as athletic, energetic as most players are at age 25. Guy was built like a rock.[/QUOTE]

[B]Indeed Agree but his Talent would be the same. He would not attack the Celtics Frontline Offensively he was not the talent. :confusedshrug:

And...here you have a 29 year old Bird (before his injury) and also a a Prime Kevin Mchale at 28 ...:confusedshrug:

Not to mention the Celtics had a bad motha fo in 6`11/250 lbs Greg Kite. A Man that could battle Rodman weather him down :) . Same with Walton :confusedshrug: . And Yes Rodman would have a very Hard Time Guarding Walton. Celtics would haven have More of an Edge Offensively and More of an Edge Court Vision/Passing Wise. Walton = was one of the Most Fundamental Centers Ever, Could Make Others Better than They Where Through Team Play, Passing , Setting Picks, Great Rebounder etc .:confusedshrug: [/B]

[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]If You DON`T`put Pippen and Rodman in the Frontline you will facilite the Greatest Frontline of All Time`s (1986 Boston celtics) Offensive Labour because Kukoc will have a Harder Time Guarding either Mchale or Bird Than ANY other Forward in the Bull`s Squad.

Bird already prooved he could School Pippen at ages 31 to 35 and even the No Backed Bird after 1989 (but Remember this is Bird in his Most Prime) :).

With Kukoc you will have better Passing and "Maybe A Slightly Better Offensive Frontline Scoring" but what is that you Must Worrty About the Celtics?

ITS STRENGHT = "FRONTLINE OFFENSIVE"

And by using this Line Up. You will have a WEAKER FRONTLINE DEFENSE and Not to mention, A WEAKER FRONTLINE REBOUNDING CAPACITY :confusedshrug:

If I was the 1996 Bulls and faced the 1986 Celtics i would go with that Frontline at home (Chicago) "MAYBE" but not in the Boston Garden.:no:

The Bulls have the Edge in the Backcourt Composed of 2 Players (Jordan, Harper and Ofcourse Improvsing Pippen at the PG spot) but the Celtics have the Edge in the Frontline Composed of [U]3 Players[/U] (Bird-McHale-Parish and Sometimes Walton whom can also be improvised as CF).

Bulls in Boston Should Go with This Line Up for Most of the Time:

PG: Pippen
SG: Jordan
PF: Rodman
PF: John Salley
C: Longley

You need 2 PFs to Try to Stop the Celtics Frontline Defensively. Any other way is Suicide fo the Bulls :confusedshrug:

But by this you re Loosing Offensive Possibilities because You have No Pippen and No Kukoc :confusedshrug:

See? The Bulls Have a Black Whole :).

The 1986 Celtics Have an Edge in 3 Positions Clearly and If the Bulls STRENGTHEN THEIR FRONTLINE DEFENSIVELY (to try To Stop the Big 3) =

THEY LOOSE OFFENSIVE CAPACITY in THEIR FRONTLINE.

The 1986 Celtics would exchange Their Line Ups Constantly from

A: More Versetaile and Offensive Oriented. Objective: "To Attack the BackCourt to Make Jorddan-Pippen and Harper Run and Work Harder"

PG: DJ
SG: AINGE
SF: BIRD
PF: McHALE
C: PARISH

B: More Defensive Oriented. Objective: "Destroy the Bull`s Weak Frontline":)

PG: DJ/Ainge
F-G: BIRD (would Play like a Combo Guard From The Edges but Will Force the Post Up Game Through Pick and Rolls Set By Great Passing CF Bill Walton)
PF: McHALE
CF: WALTON/KITE (Objetive: Tire Down Rodman and Salley :pimp: )
C: PARISH

Bulls have no Chance :violin: :[/B]:[/QUOTE]
why do you continue to say that mid 30s bird "schooled" pip? i remember 87 lakers posting birds stats against a younger pip and i posted pips and birds averages for the respective seasons in question. and it was basically dead even and pip made bird average about 5-6 TOs a game. and that was with a young pip and older early 30s bird. neither in their respective primes.

as for all the other nonsense, everything you stated is all ridiculous. i would appreciate the opportinity the rebut facts on why the celtics would beat the bulls. but you wont state any. and this is because of two reasons.

1. you dont have any facts to support your claim

2. the few facts you do have are subject to interpretation. ie the league was watered down but basketball was at its most popular which would mean ther were plenty of talented players to choose from. unlike in the 60,70 when most great athletes were either in track and field, boxing, play baseball, or football. honestly, basketball in the 60s and 70s which affected talent in the 80s was probably the fifth most popular sport in that time period.

and the other fact you use is posting stats of players in the 80s which was by all accounts a more uptempo aggressive offensive era as opposed to the 90s. which was more physical and halfcourt and defense based. and when you equal pace there really is no difference which has been proven time after time after time after time and you and others refuse to admit it.

why do you continue to say that mid 30s bird "schooled" pip? i remember 87 lakers posting birds stats against a younger pip and i posted pips and birds averages for the respective seasons in question. and it was basically dead even and pip made bird average about 5-6 TOs a game. and that was with a young pip and older early 30s bird. neither in their respective primes.

as for all the other nonsense, everything you stated is all ridiculous. i would appreciate the opportinity the rebut facts on why the celtics would beat the bulls. but you wont state any. and this is because of two reasons.

1. you dont have any facts to support your claim

2. the few facts you do have are subject to interpretation. ie the league was watered down but basketball was at its most popular which would mean ther were plenty of talented players to choose from. unlike in the 60,70 when most great athletes were either in track and field, boxing, play baseball, or football. honestly, basketball in the 60s and 70s which affected talent in the 80s was probably the fifth most popular sport in that time period.

and the other fact you use is posting stats of players in the 80s which was by all accounts a more uptempo aggressive offensive era as opposed to the 90s. which was more physical and halfcourt and defense based. and when you equal pace there really is no difference which has been proven time after time after time after time and you and others refuse to admit it.[/QUOTE]

[B][U]31-32 or 33 year old Larry Bird Owning Pippen in the Post /Last Second Shot in Pippen`s and Jordan`s Face[/U]

[url]http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=WoGmMx8Ejrw[/url]

*Pippen Guarding Him

:) :confusedshrug:

[U]SF Larry Bird Facing SF Scottie Pippen All Time Stats Avgs. [/U]

Bird Ages 31 to 35 (Passed His Prime)
Pippen Ages 22 to 26 (In His Prime)

*Not To Forget that POWER FORWARD Horace Grant had to Guard Bird Most of the Time Because Pippen Could Not Guard Him Very Well.

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=birdla01&p2=pippesc01[/url]

[U]SF Larry Bird Facing PF Horace Grant All Time Stat Avgs[/U]

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=birdla01&p2=grantho01[/url]

*Man who Guarded Larry Bird Most of the Time:

Bird: Ages 31 to 35 (Passed His Prime)
Grant: Ages 22 to 26 (In His Prime)

[U]34 Year Old Larry Bird Schooling Power Forward Horace Grant[/U]

1990-91 Bulls Championship Season. Celtics Win :)

*Grant Guarding Him

34 year old back crippled Larry Bird Beats the Bulls Once Again Hitting The Last Seconds Most Important Shot. A Jumper On A Prime Horace Grant`s Face and the Foul! :)

[url]http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=NTqDdZz2dHM[/url]

Check Out Horace Grant`s Face at 9.47 :)

Larry Bird: 34 Points, 15 Rebounds and 8 Assits.

:confusedshrug:

[U]Larry Bird Schooling Scottie Pippen Again[/U]

1990. Bulls win

*Pippen Guarding Him

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAOx36A48wU[/url]

33 year old Larry Bird: 38 Points, 11 Rebounds and 9 Assits.[/B]

[B][U]Celtics School the Bulls (In Chicago) Once Again 1990[/U][/B]

:)

[url]http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=y19q9478NUo[/url]

[B]I Have Already Posted Enough Information and Facts. It is your Bull Fanship that has Blinded you from Admiting Them :) [/B]

:sleeping :violin:

[QUOTE=west]it's the first time that i kinda respect Sir Charles post,but really,what he post is kinda makes sense:applause:

i think pretty much 80% people in the world would agree MJ>Magic,Bird,but as a team 86 Celtics,87 Lakers>96 Bulls[/QUOTE]

[B]MJ > Bird and Magic as a SG

Bird > Jordan and Magic as a SF

Magic > Bird and Jordan as PG

:confusedshrug: [/B]

[QUOTE=Sir Charles]Excessive marketing" in the 80s is BS.

[B]Excesve Marketing in the 90s. 80s Was B-Ball Fan Oriented. [/B]

The Lakers/Celtics played in an era with several fewer teams, so the talent around the NBA was less spread out.

:no:

[B]Less Spread Out = Chance of More than 1 Good/Great Player To End Up Playing in the Same Team of Another Good/Great Player :)

Fewer Teams = Better Player Selection. More Quantity Average Players Sent to the ABA of Weaker Leagues. Bye Bye to Bad Players :)...[/B]

If you put a Jordan-Pippen-Rodman core in that era they'd have a better supporting cast because the league wasn't as watered down.

[B]We are talking about the 1995-96 Bulls and the 1985-86 Celtics. No the What Ifs :no:

I could also say What If Bird played with Kareem and Magic as a Core of a Team or if Barkley played with his Ideal Style of A Running Offense Team Lead by a Great Passing PG or with the Lakers. Imagine Worthy as SF, Charles as PF and Kareem in the Frontline?[/B]

But that's not Jordan-Pippen-Rodman's fault.

Also Rodman at 35 was still as athletic, energetic as most players are at age 25. Guy was built like a rock.[/QUOTE]

[B]Indeed Agree but his Talent would be the same. He would not attack the Celtics Frontline Offensively he was not the talent. :confusedshrug:

And...here you have a 29 year old Bird (before his injury) and also a a Prime Kevin Mchale at 28 ...:confusedshrug:

Not to mention the Celtics had a bad motha fo in 6`11/250 lbs Greg Kite. A Man that could battle Rodman weather him down :) . Same with Walton :confusedshrug: . And Yes Rodman would have a very Hard Time Guarding Walton. Celtics would haven have More of an Edge Offensively and More of an Edge Court Vision/Passing Wise. Walton = was one of the Most Fundamental Centers Ever, Could Make Others Better than They Where Through Team Play, Passing , Setting Picks, Great Rebounder etc .:confusedshrug: [/B][/QUOTE

This poster is fool for saying Greg Kite of all people who was never a factor in any series he ever played in his career would be a factor in something. If you're talking '96 Bulls vs '86 Celtics the only thing you can do is talk what ifs because it never happened and could never happen. The most stupid aspect of this board is when posters speculate about matchups and situations that never happened and could never happen and state their opinions on hypothetical situations as fact.

[QUOTE=Sir Charles]why do you continue to say that mid 30s bird "schooled" pip? i remember 87 lakers posting birds stats against a younger pip and i posted pips and birds averages for the respective seasons in question. and it was basically dead even and pip made bird average about 5-6 TOs a game. and that was with a young pip and older early 30s bird. neither in their respective primes.

as for all the other nonsense, everything you stated is all ridiculous. i would appreciate the opportinity the rebut facts on why the celtics would beat the bulls. but you wont state any. and this is because of two reasons.

1. you dont have any facts to support your claim

2. the few facts you do have are subject to interpretation. ie the league was watered down but basketball was at its most popular which would mean ther were plenty of talented players to choose from. unlike in the 60,70 when most great athletes were either in track and field, boxing, play baseball, or football. honestly, basketball in the 60s and 70s which affected talent in the 80s was probably the fifth most popular sport in that time period.

and the other fact you use is posting stats of players in the 80s which was by all accounts a more uptempo aggressive offensive era as opposed to the 90s. which was more physical and halfcourt and defense based. and when you equal pace there really is no difference which has been proven time after time after time after time and you and others refuse to admit it.[/QUOTE]

[B][U]31-32 or 33 year old Larry Bird Owning Pippen in the Post /Last Second Shot in Pippen`s and Jordan`s Face[/U]

[url]http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=WoGmMx8Ejrw[/url]

*Pippen Guarding Him

:) :confusedshrug:

[U]SF Larry Bird Facing SF Scottie Pippen All Time Stats Avgs. [/U]

Bird Ages 31 to 35 (Passed His Prime)
Pippen Ages 22 to 26 (In His Prime)

*Not To Forget that POWER FORWARD Horace Grant had to Guard Bird Most of the Time Because Pippen Could Not Guard Him Very Well.

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=birdla01&p2=pippesc01[/url]

[U]SF Larry Bird Facing PF Horace Grant All Time Stat Avgs[/U]

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=birdla01&p2=grantho01[/url]

*Man who Guarded Larry Bird Most of the Time:

Bird: Ages 31 to 35 (Passed His Prime)
Grant: Ages 22 to 26 (In His Prime)

[U]34 Year Old Larry Bird Schooling Power Forward Horace Grant[/U]

1990-91 Bulls Championship Season. Celtics Win :)

*Grant Guarding Him

34 year old back crippled Larry Bird Beats the Bulls Once Again Hitting The Last Seconds Most Important Shot. A Jumper On A Prime Horace Grant`s Face and the Foul! :)

[url]http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=NTqDdZz2dHM[/url]

Check Out Horace Grant`s Face at 9.47 :)

Larry Bird: 34 Points, 15 Rebounds and 8 Assits.

:confusedshrug:

[U]Larry Bird Schooling Scottie Pippen Again[/U]

1990. Bulls win

*Pippen Guarding Him

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAOx36A48wU[/url]

33 year old Larry Bird: 38 Points, 11 Rebounds and 9 Assits.[/B]

[B][U]Celtics School the Bulls (In Chicago) Once Again 1990[/U][/B]

:)

[url]http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=y19q9478NUo[/url]

[B]I Have Already Posted Enough Information and Facts. It is your Bull Fanship that has Blinded you from Admiting Them :) [/B]

:sleeping :violin:[/QUOTE]
your videos really dont show much, yes that was a great shot by bird but that is one play. im sure that i can give you instances of players scoring on bird or even out playn him on a particular night and i dont think you would call it a determining factor? the video also shows pippen scoring on dennis johnson but i wouldnt say that a few video clips is the end all to be all.

and since when is 22-26 a players prime? i always believed a players prime years are from 26-32. some hold longer some shorter. not to mention, i showed you that pipi and bird played to a stand still offensively and pip out played him defensiverly when you count TOs.

not to mention that old injured back larry bird was healthy enough to hoist at least 20 shots in alot of those matchups. thats telling me that he was just fine.

[QUOTE=puppychili]Lets play Sir Charles' game here and really break down the Celtics competition in the 86 playoffs.

In the first round they played the Bulls who they swept. The Bulls were pretty much Michael Jordan and a bunch of scrubs coached by Stan Albeck. Yet Jordan managed to get by this "great Boston front line" consistently and averaged 43 pts a game for the series with one of those games going to double OT. But you're gonna tell me that a prime Jordan along with Pippen and Rodman coached by Phil Jackson would have as you say NO CHANCE against this Boston team. You can't be serious.

This great Boston team couldn't stop Jordan at all that series. And what your match ups fail to account for is that Jordan is gonna be double sometimes even triple teamed. The Celtics did it to him and 86 and they couldn't stop him. Imagine him with a Kerr or Kukoc to kick it out to out of the double team. I think Kerr has proved that he can hit clutch shots in the playoffs Oh but thats right, according to you the Bulls would have "no chance". How ****ing ignorant.

But wait I'm not done. Who did the Celtics play in the 2nd round? The Atlanta Hawks. Theres an eastern conference power for you. They never got past the 2nd round of the playoffs and their peak was taking the Celtics to 7 games in 1988. You really gonna try and tell me that the 86 Hawks were better or even on par with the 91 Pistons, 93 Knicks, or 96 Magic just to name a few.

Now were at the Eastern Conference Finals. Who were the Celtics opponents for the east crown? The Immortal Milwaukee Bucks. Theres a perennial eastern power for you. Led in scoring that year by the great Sidney Moncrief. Of course the Celtics walked all over them. But not cause they were an inferior opponent. These are the 80's were talking about. You would of had to of been one kick ass team on the verge of greatness to make all the way to the east finals to challenge the 86' Celtics. Right?

By the way before we get to the Finals, lets review who the starting centers were for these 3 teams. Alton Lister, Jon Koncak and wait for it...... Dave Corzine. However did I think that Ewing and Shaq could hold a candle to these guys.:confusedshrug:

Now to the Finals where the Celtics beat the Houston Rockets in 6 games. Rockets were a good team mind you. No joke there. But their comptition was the Reggie Theus led Kings and legendary Denver Nuggets before punking the defending champion Lakers in 5 games. (Wonder what the Laker fans excuse is for that). But lets be real here even though the Rockets were a good team, they were satisfied just to get to the Finals much like the Lebron led Cavs were against the Spurs. No one gave these Rockets a chance at the time, but it took the Celtics 6 games to put them away for the title.
[B]
YOU GONNA TELL ME THAT THE 96 BULLS DON'T STAND A BETTER CHANCE OF BEATING THE CELTICS THAN THE 86 ROCKETS?!?!?!?!?![/B]

A Rockets team mind you that followed up their Finals run by going out in the 2nd and first round respectively over the next 2 seasons. The 96 Bulls only followed their Finals win with 2 more titles including a 69 win season.

But thats right, all thats diluted cause the Bulls never had to get by the 86 Bucks.

:banghead:[/QUOTE]

I love how all these guys just glossed over this post. Tells you all you need to know.

Why'd you ignore this post guys? It was written two pages ago and you didn't even respond to it.

The Celtics beat the Hawks in 7 Games. The Celtics beat the Lakers in 6 Games.

Hawks > Lakers:confusedshrug:

[QUOTE]Prime 32 year Parish > Any Bulls Center
Prime 28 year McHale > 35 year old Rodman
Prime 29 year old Bird (even at ages 31 to 35 after his injury schooled) > Pippen
Prime 26 Ainge < 32 Year Old Jordan
*But Still Ainge was No Easy Task
DJ = Harper[/QUOTE]

You've said this a million times in this thread and it's a lame way to make a judgment. These aren't 5 guys playing one on one. These are two teams playing each other. You completely ignore the fact that Jordan is gonna be double teamed constantly. He didn't slash all the time like he did in the 80's but he still could when he wanted to. Make no mistake about that. He just developed a killer fadeaway so he could conserve energy. Those great front line celtics triple teamed him and couldn't stop him.

So not on paper but in reality the matchup is gonna be.

Bulls player>no one guarding him cause he's helping on Jordan
Jordan> Double team

or even sometimes

Bulls player>no one guarding him cause he's helping on Jordan
Bulls player>no one guarding him cause he's helping on Jordan
Jordan>/= Triple team

The 86 Celtics had no answer for a young inexperience Jordan. I argue that they would have an even tougher time with veteran championship experienced Jordan who made his teammates better with a HOF coach.

I would also argue that since it took this great Celtics team 6 games to beat a Rockets team that never got past the 2nd round again till the mid 90's, that the Celtics would have a much tougher time with the 96 72-10 champion Bulls.

I'll say this again, hopefully for the last time. I don't have a problem with people saying the the 86 Celtics would beat the 96 Bulls or that the 80's were stronger than the 90's. I do though have a problem with the way people exaggerate it and act like it's some sort of fundamental fact. I have a problem with how theres this sort of conventional wisdom that the 80's were stacked with all star teams from head to toe and that the 90's were a wasteland. I think that I and a few other posters on this board have debunked the notion that it was [B]that overwhelming[/B]. And to say that a 90's Jordan led Bulls team would have NO CHANCE against any team in NBA history is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

You wanna say that a 90's Jordan led Bulls would lose to this or that team. I'm fine with that as long as you show me compelling evidence and take many things into account. Sir Charles just keeps spitting out the same match up drivel and acting like it's some sort of rule of nature which is stupid.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]The Celtics beat the Hawks in 7 Games. The Celtics beat the Lakers in 6 Games.

Hawks > Lakers:confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]


Celtics lost to the Pistons the year they went 7 games with the Hawks.

But I do see the point you're trying to make and I agree with it. You can't just compare teams by saying who beat who and who lost to who. It has to be a part of a bigger argument. In some cases though that theory holds more weight than at other times.

Just like you can't say that this team would beat that team solely cause they win more of the individual match ups.

This is why debating teams from different eras is very fun but also kinda pointless.:D

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]The Celtics beat the Hawks in 7 Games. The Celtics beat the Lakers in 6 Games.

Hawks > Lakers:confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]

As chili mentioned, you can't automatically compare teams based on who lost to who. There are obviously variables involved. The point is that there's just no way you can say the Celtics would just automatically beat the Bulls when the Bulls were obviously superior to that Hawks team. I'm in the camp that thinks the Bulls are the best team ever, however I also realize that they would have a challenge against the Celtics and Lakers. You types just want to assume that it's no contest between them. With many Laker fans it's usually because of some inner desire to marginalize Jordan. I've seen it from Laker fans far more than fans of any other team, including the Celtics. When one group of fans is overwhelmingly a certain way, it's a pretty clear indication of certain biases.