Printable View
97 bulls, to answer your question, I'm not sure who'd win. When I feel teams are usually close, I have a hard time predicting and all I can say is it can go either way.
Also, you were getting on Da Realist for making a biased post. Your handle is 97 bulls. Come on man. You don't see the irony in that?
Also, you said Pippen and Jordan were the only two way players on the first three peat team. Horace Grant was definitely a two way player. He couldn
1st 3peat bulls of course.. You have prime MJ and after Mike left them, 3 Bulls players makes the all star BJ, Scottie and Grant..
While the 2nd 3peat turn Mike into wanna be Kobe.. Still great and the best in the league but still not like when he was in his prime.. This team is just full of veteran players who fit perfectly in the triangle offense but still not better than 1st 3peat who were young and athletic..
[QUOTE=NugzHeat3]97 bulls, to answer your question, I'm not sure who'd win. When I feel teams are usually close, I have a hard time predicting and all I can say is it can go either way.
Also, you were getting on Da Realist for making a biased post. Your handle is 97 bulls. Come on man. You don't see the irony in that?
Also, you said Pippen and Jordan were the only two way players on the first three peat team. Horace Grant was definitely a two way player. He couldn
[QUOTE=I LUV KOBE]1st 3peat bulls of course.. You have prime MJ and after Mike left them, 3 Bulls players makes the all star BJ, Scottie and Grant..
While the 2nd 3peat turn Mike into wanna be Kobe.. Still great and the best in the league but still not like when he was in his prime.. This team is just full of veteran players who fit perfectly in the triangle offense but still not better than 1st 3peat who were young and athletic..[/QUOTE]
Lol what are you talking about? Rodman made all star games, kukoc was the best player in eurpoe and an olympian when he joined the Bulls. And was the best sixthman in the league. And they were just as athletic if not more than the first threepeat bulls. The only difference was they were older. But throughout history, veteran teams almost always win out over younger teams. Even more talented younger teams.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]His bias also shows when he says the first threepeats bench was better by saying they contributed and hit big shots etc. Well shit so did the second threepeats bench. [/QUOTE]
You're a keyboard warrior so I try not to get into long discussions with you, but...
Where did I say FTP bench was better? I said they should get some credit and I pointed out the differences. In fact, earlier in the thread I said
[QUOTE=Da_Realist]The bench may be the only real advantage the S3P Bulls might have had over the F3P version. [/QUOTE]
:facepalm
[QUOTE=Da_Realist]You're a keyboard warrior so I try not to get into long discussions with you, but...
Where did I say FTP bench was better? I said they should get some credit and I pointed out the differences. In fact, earlier in the thread I said
:facepalm[/QUOTE]
Nice job taking a snippet of my reply to youre post. I reread your post twice and still came away feeling that you feel the first threepeats bench was better. And thats your opinion. But they werent versitle two way players. And if they were, so was the second threepeats bench players.
I dont know what a keyboard warrior is. This is a forum made to state opinions. If you dont want people to reply or question yours then dont post them.
[QUOTE=NugzHeat3]97 bulls, to answer your question, I'm not sure who'd win. When I feel teams are usually close, I have a hard time predicting and all I can say is it can go either way.
Also, you were getting on Da Realist for making a biased post. Your handle is 97 bulls. Come on man. You don't see the irony in that?
Also, you said Pippen and Jordan were the only two way players on the first three peat team. Horace Grant was definitely a two way player. He couldn
Jordan and Pippen were better during the 1st 3 peat, but the 2nd 3 peat actually had a good 6th man and better overall defense.
@Da Realist
What do you think of the match-up between FTP MJ vs STP MJ? Who could give more problems to the other team? I'd really like to hear your thoughts on this. Thnx :rockon:
back on topic.
Personally I do think that the 2nd Three Peat team was better, prolly cause of STP Pip(better player IMO), Worm and the bench.
[QUOTE=Da_Realist]I think "two-way" confused some people. I didn't mean BJ was this great defensive player. Or that Scott Williams could average 30 points. They were who they were on both ends. BJ wasn't such a liability that he needed to be taken out of a close game and subbed for someone else. Scott Williams didn't need to be switched out with Stacy King because one was great offensively and the other was great defensively. Sometimes being average or serviceable on both ends is better than being a superstar on one end and a liability on the other. 97Bulls, I said [I]sometimes[/I]. Overall, I would still give the edge to the STP bench. However, STP team needed that advantage more than FTP team.[/QUOTE]
Fair enough. I do think your overrating th liability thing though. All teams have that problem. Even more, i rarely ever remember phil jackson ever subbing defense for offense like that aside from the 98 finals. His finishers were normally, jordan pippen rodman kukoc and longley. Now you had situational lineups, but as i said, all teams have that.
The first threepeat Bulls i guess didnt really have to sub out player like that, but that was more because they had no choice. Scott Wialliams, Stacy King, Cliff Levingston, and will Perdue were for all intents and purposes the same type of player. 6'9-6'11 hustler/dirty work players. They didnt post up, or had great jumpers orand anything like that. They scored off dump offs and offensive rebounds. Paxson, Armstrong, and Tucker were the same player too. 6'2 lightsout jumpshooters. They werent gonna put the ball on the floor, or lock a guy down on defense or run the offense like a traditional PG. If armsrtong was your starter and was getting lit up by the PG were you gonna be able to go to pax?
Its why Jordan was depended on so much. They had no ther choice after Pippen.
Its why the second threepeat team was so much better. They could win with Jordan having off nights. And win in different ways. The players all brought their own special dynamic that made them har to play against
'91-93 Jordan was the greatest player of all-time...which is why I would never bet against him.
[QUOTE=scandisk_]@Da Realist
What do you think of the match-up between FTP MJ vs STP MJ? Who could give more problems to the other team? I'd really like to hear your thoughts on this. Thnx :rockon:
back on topic.
Personally I do think that the 2nd Three Peat team was better, prolly cause of STP Pip(better player IMO), Worm and the bench.[/QUOTE]
I still pretty much agree with what I said earlier...
[QUOTE=Da_Realist]I believe the 1st 3Peat (F3P) Bulls were better than the 2nd 3Peat
(S3P) Bulls.
First, the F3P Bulls were younger. The S3P Bulls couldn't keep up with
those young guys. F3P Michael was better, more efficient and could
raise his game even higher if he wanted to (he could have broken 70 in
game 1 of the 92 Finals, for example). S3P MJ couldn't have done that.
F3P Pippen and S3P Pippen basically cancel each other out. However
Grant was more versatile than Dennis Rodman. Dennis Rodman was a great
rebounder but he was 35-37 years old when he played for the Bulls. He
was a much better player in Detroit than he was in Chicago.
Rodman averaged 5.2 pts, 2.8 asts, 15.3 rebs, 0.6 stls, 0.3 blks, 2.0
tov on 45 fg% in F3P.
Grant averaged 13.4 pts, 2.5 asts, 9.3 rebs, 1.2 stls, 1.3 blks, 1.3
tov on 54 fg% in S3P.
Grant averaged more points, more steals, more blocks, less turnovers
and he shot a LOT better from the field.
This doesn't take into account the havoc Grant created on the floor
defensively (full court and half court) and it also doesn't measure
the distractions, suspensions and drama Rodman brought to the table
every year he was in Chicago. Rodman missed an average of 15 games per
season during the S3P, Grant only missed an average of 3 games during the F3P.
S3P Ron Harper was a real advantage defensively over F3P John Paxson
but John's advantage was his sharpshooting and clutchness. Ron gets
the edge here, but John's defensive deficiency would be cancelled out
because of the extra versatility of a young MJ and Pippen (full court
defense, half court defense, more spring and more stamina) that S3P MJ
and Pip could not provide. In other words, the S3P Bulls needed Ron
Harper's 6-6 frame and defensive ability because MJ was too old to
chase down younger guys defensively and still have super-human
efficiency. With that said, S3P MJ still wasn't as efficient as the
F3P version.
The bench may be the only real advantage the S3P Bulls might have had
over the F3P version. However, the starters for the F3P team was just
plain better and more versatile than the starters for the S3P team.
They were younger, could play full-court defense or half-court
defense. MJ was holding down guards from Isiah Thomas to Clyde Drexler
while still shooting over 50% from the field. Horace was putting up
numbers without getting suspended every 5th game. John Paxson was a
dependable shooter in the clutch to take pressure off of double and
triple teams on MJ -- and when he lost a step, BJ Armstrong stepped
in.
Toni Kucoc was a spark for S3P offensively, but he was a huge
liability on defense. Soft as tissue paper. And fragile emotionally
too. If he didn't start, he'd sulk. The rest of the bench was full of
old stiffs like John Salley, James Edwards and Robert Parish. The
young Bulls had guys like BJ Armstrong, Cliff Levingston, Craig Hodges
and Scott Williams that would provide a real spark. Especially in the
91 and 92 playoffs.
The S3P Bulls had to pace themselves because of age. MJ, Scottie,
Harper and Rodman were all advanced in age and couldn't put out max
effort 48 min/game. They had trouble with young, athletic teams like
the Sonics and Lakers. They were smart enough to pick and choose when
to go all out and still win championships. The S3P Bulls was a great
team but they wouldn't have been able to pick and choose against the
F3P Bulls. MJ had the same heart and hunger but he had young legs and
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6og_pOVi2w"]stamina that amazed even other NBA stars[/URL].
As great as MJ was, he was known to get a little tired if he had to
carry too much of the load for too long in the S3P. He was good enough
to withstand it and lead his team because no one was good enough to
outlast him even at 90%. But we're talking about F3P MJ. That guy
never got tired. He was a machine.
It would be close but ultimately I choose F3P Bulls.[/QUOTE]
With that said, I think 92 Bulls were the best of the bunch with the 97 team not far behind. S3P team seemed to be more focused and committed to what they did best (run triangle, defend, rebound). F3P was more versatile in what they could do and was more willing to experiment more. Sometimes they were committed to the triangle, sometimes they just beat you on plain athleticism or let MJ do his thing. That happened in the S3P, but not as often. Because of that the S3P team didn't have as many lapses as the F3P team. But, I'd still go with the F3P team if forced to choose.
[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]'91-93 Jordan was the greatest player of all-time...which is why I would never bet against him.[/QUOTE]
Oh come on bro. He wasnt that far off to make that kind of determination.
[QUOTE=Da_Realist]I still pretty much agree with what I said earlier...
With that said, I think 92 Bulls were the best of the bunch with the 97 team not far behind. S3P team seemed to be more focused and committed to what they did best (run triangle, defend, rebound). F3P was more versatile in what they could do and was more willing to experiment more. Sometimes they were committed to the triangle, sometimes they just beat you on plain athleticism or let MJ do his thing. That happened in the S3P, but not as often. Because of that the S3P team didn't have as many lapses as the F3P team. But, I'd still go with the F3P team if forced to choose.[/QUOTE]
This sounds more like a preference than a determination on which team was better. You make it seem as if a team running their offense to perfection is a bad thing.
An for the life of me i cant figure out why you would say the first threepeat team was more versitle. As i stated earlier. All their players did the exact same thing outside of Jordan and Pippen. Thats not versitle. And their offense? More a product of inimprovisation. Jordan still had a tendancy to try to take matters into his own hand. He was more of a team player during the second threepeat.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Oh come on bro. He wasnt that far off to make that kind of determination.[/QUOTE]
I think you really underestimate peak Jordan, man. Swap '91-93 with 96-98 MJ and you still think Chicago beats Riley's Knicks? :confusedshrug:
Here are my top 5 Bulls teams:
'92
'96
'93
'97
'91
[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]I think you really underestimate peak Jordan, man. Swap '91-93 with 96-98 MJ and you still think Chicago beats Riley's Knicks? :confusedshrug:
Here are my top 5 Bulls teams:
'92
'96
'93
'97
'91[/QUOTE]
Absolutely. I mean, the knicks barely beat the Bulls without Jordan in 94.
Jordan FG% was higher during the first threepeat cuz he attacked the basket more. Seond threepeat Jordan took more jumpers and fadeaways in an effort to minimize tthe pounding and stamina loss. Not because he couldnt attack the basket anymore. Someone posted the Knicks scouting report on Jordan. The one thing that stood out to me was that in it, it said to make him a jumshooter. He only shot 41% on jumpers. This was prime Jordan (using your words). Second threepeat Jordan was primarily a jumpshooter. And shot a much better percentage on his jumpshots. Did you read that interview with John bach? To summarize, he said Jordan was more used in the post and a jumpshooter and did this to save energy. And that he wasnt really big on trying to dunk on everyone anymore. Not because he couldnt, but cuz it was no longer needed
As far as his defense, being able to use Ron Harper to defend the other players best perimeter players is a luxery. Jordan was still a great defender. They still were able to full court press a team and shut them down just look at what they did to Orlando in 96 and Indiana in 98. Jordan wasnt on the bench when the Bulls pressed. Jordan dominated a damn good and crafty and quick PG in Rod Strickland in 97.
The stamina thing is over blown. Like I stated earlier, in game 5 of the 93 finals, the Bulls coughed up a fourth quarer lead. The announcers said Jordan stated he got tired and couldnt finish. This was supposed to be prime (according to you) Jordan. Yes he got tired too. In game 6 of the 92 finals, Jackson sat jordan down cuz Jordan was gassed. Jordan was vehemently against joining the Dreamteam cuz he wanted to be able to rest from a tireing season. Yes Jordan got tired in his 20s too. Did he have as much stamina during the second threepeat? Perhaps not but it didnt matter cuz they had soo many guys that could take pressure and roles that those exploits werent needed. You had Harper, Brown, hell even Jud Buechler was an excellent man defender and athlete. Along with Jordan and Pippen.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Absolutely. I mean, the knicks barely beat the Bulls without Jordan in 94.[/quote]
True, but the '92 and '93 Knicks were better teams. You raise valid points though (very good post btw). I just don't agree that '96-98 Jordan had the same impact '91-93 did. As you said, Mike in his 20's was a very good slasher and finisher. His playstyle put more pressure on defenses, whether it was fouling them out or finding shooters on the kick outs (FTP was also a better playmaker).
That bit on Jordan shooting 41% on his jumpers is a little disingenuous. I'm pretty sure that playbook was including his 3PT fieldgoals. I personally would love to see Mike's percentage from midrange during the first 3-peat. Way too many people underrate his shooting ability...you would think he was Lebron or something. :oldlol:
I'm a big fan of the '96-98 Bulls and I think the '96 and '97 teams would beat versions '91 and '93 on their best night. The biggest difference to me is Dennis Rodman and Pip. Worm didn't just pull down boards but also defended the oppositions best bigman. Guy was incredibly versatile. I loved his energy and electricity for STP. I think it was Jordan that said they wouldn't have won the second wave of titles without Rodman, or [I]with[/I] Horace Grant. As for Pippen, dude was in his prime and helped Jordan by playing point forward orchestrating the Bulls offense.
Those two made STP dangerous. They're the main reason teams '91 and possibly '93 get eliminated in a 7 game series.
[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]True, but the '92 and '93 Knicks were better teams. You raise valid points though (very good post btw). I just don't agree that '96-98 Jordan had the same impact '91-93 did. As you said, Mike in his 20's was a very good slasher and finisher. His playstyle put more pressure on defenses, whether it was fouling them out or finding shooters on the kick outs (FTP was also a better playmaker).
That bit on Jordan shooting 41% on his jumpers is a little disingenuous. I'm pretty sure that playbook was including his 3PT fieldgoals. I personally would love to see Mike's percentage from midrange during the first 3-peat. Way too many people underrate his shooting ability...you would think he was Lebron or something. :oldlol:
I'm a big fan of the '96-98 Bulls and I think the '96 and '97 teams would beat versions '91 and '93 on their best night. The biggest difference to me is Dennis Rodman and Pip. Worm didn't just pull down boards but also defended the oppositions best bigman. Guy was incredibly versatile. I loved his energy and electricity for STP. I think it was Jordan that said they wouldn't have won the second wave of titles without Rodman, or [I]with[/I] Horace Grant. As for Pippen, dude was in his prime and helped Jordan by playing point forward orchestrating the Bulls offense.
Those two made STP dangerous. They're the main reason teams '91 and possibly '93 get eliminated in a 7 game series.[/QUOTE]
So what makes the 92 team the best? Surely not because they played the 92 Knicks?
[QUOTE=97 bulls]So what makes the 92 team the best? Surely not because they played the 92 Knicks?[/QUOTE]
Short answer? Best combination of Jordan/Pippen. Better than any of the other title teams. It also didn't hurt to have Grant play the best season of his career (sans '94).
The Knicks got jobbed in '92 against the Bulls
[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]Short answer? Best combination of Jordan/Pippen. Better than any of the other title teams. It also didn't hurt to have Grant play the best season of his career (sans '94).[/QUOTE]
I dont think there was much difference between Pippen in 92 or any other year between 92 and 97. I take that back. I do think Pippen became a different player from 94 on cuz he got to be the leader. He demanded respect and proved his worth. His status changed.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]I dont think there was much difference between Pippen in 92 or any other year between 92 and 97. I take that back. I do think Pippen became a different player from 94 on cuz he got to be the leader. He demanded respect and proved his worth. His status changed.[/QUOTE]
I think you misunderstood me, 97. I'm not saying Pippen was better in '92 than he was from '94-98. To me, circa '92 was very close to his peak ('94-97) while Jordan was playing at a GOAT level. That's the difference.
From 1995-97, the Bulls had peak Pippen, but an out of prime Jordan (this is where we don't agree).
One thing you guys aren't mentioning is that Pippen was always banged up come playoff time during the second three peat. It didn't effect him on defense but it did hurt and limit his offensive game a good bit.
Hmm...
Johnny Pax > Steve Kerr
Horace Grant > Dennis
Ton Kukoc > Cliff Levingston
92 Jordan > 96 Jordan
On balance Gotta go with 92 Bulls as the winner in 7
Oh....Chicago Stadium beats United Center
[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]I think you misunderstood me, 97. I'm not saying Pippen was better in '92 than he was from '94-98. To me, circa '92 was very close to his peak ('94-97) while Jordan was playing at a GOAT level. That's the difference.
From 1995-97, the Bulls had peak Pippen, but an out of prime Jordan (this is where we don't agree).[/QUOTE]
Which goes back to what Ive been saying for the longest. The only reason a person could ever choose the first threepeat Bulls over the second is the their feelings of Jordan. And theres nothing youve stated that would give an indication that Jordan was better besides a preference. And thats in spite of so many contrary povs. Most notably Jordan himself.
And thats kinda sad that you feel you know Jordan better than jordan himself.
[QUOTE=StarJordan]Hmm...
Johnny Pax > Steve Kerr
Horace Grant > Dennis
Ton Kukoc > Cliff Levingston
92 Jordan > 96 Jordan
On balance Gotta go with 92 Bulls as the winner in 7[/QUOTE]
Lol Horace Grant is better than Dennis Rodman the Hall of Famer? The greatest rebounder and defender ever? Shows how much you know.
Go look up who had the highest 3pt% career wise.
I have a feeling you know not much about the Bulls past Jordan was a great dunker.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Which goes back to what Ive been saying for the longest. The only reason a person could ever choose the first threepeat Bulls over the second is the their feelings of Jordan. And theres nothing youve stated that would give an indication that Jordan was better besides a preference. And thats in spite of so many contrary povs. Most notably Jordan himself.
And thats kinda sad that you feel you know Jordan better than jordan himself.[/QUOTE]
Aside from being in his physical prime and having a CLEAR statistical advantage? What else is there to say? I dont have a horse in this race. In fact, I like all said teams the same.
You're already taking shots at me, so lets just agree to disagree.
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Lol Horace Grant is better than Dennis Rodman the Hall of Famer? The greatest rebounder and defender ever? Shows how much you know.
Go look up who had the highest 3pt% career wise.
I have a feeling you know not much about the Bulls past Jordan was a great dunker.[/QUOTE]
Rodman was 35-37 years old on the Bulls. Also Grant often times in 1992 and 1993 was 2nd on the team in win shares and ahead of Pippen.
[QUOTE=Duncan21formvp]Rodman was 35-37 years old on the Bulls. Also Grant often times in 1992 and 1993 was 2nd on the team in win shares and ahead of Pippen.[/QUOTE]
Who cares how old Rodman was? If the man produced then he produced. Whenever the age excuse arises i always reply with this. Was Nolan Ryna 100 mile an hour fastball any easier to hit cuz he was 40?
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Who cares how old Rodman was? If the man produced then he produced. Whenever the age excuse arises i always reply with this. Was Nolan Ryna 100 mile an hour fastball any easier to hit cuz he was 40?[/QUOTE]
Yeah but Grant produced more than Rodman.
[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]Aside from being in his physical prime and having a CLEAR statistical advantage? What else is there to say? I dont have a horse in this race. In fact, I like all said teams the same.
You're already taking shots at me, so lets just agree to disagree.[/QUOTE]
Im not taking shots at you bro. But you do have a horse in this Jordan race once you put your money on first threepeat jordan. Im the one saying neither was better than the other. But Id take a vet over athleticism anyday. Your the one acting as if jordan was a shell that needed to be carried or something.
Honestly, would you really try to argue with Jordan himself if he were to tell you he was only slightly quicker in his 20s when compared to his 30s?
[QUOTE=Duncan21formvp]Yeah but Grant produced more than Rodman.[/QUOTE]
Then why isnt Grant in the hall of fame?
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Then why isnt Grant in the hall of fame?[/QUOTE]
Rodman isn't in the hall of fame based on Chicago, he is based on Detroit. He was a 2x DPOY with Detroit and 2x allstar. He was nothing in Chicago.
[QUOTE=Duncan21formvp]Rodman isn't in the hall of fame based on Chicago, he is based on Detroit. He was a 2x DPOY with Detroit and 2x allstar. He was nothing in Chicago.[/QUOTE]
Three championships and three reounding titles? The 72 wins? The all defense team? Dont be a fool
[QUOTE=97 bulls]Im not taking shots at you bro. But you do have a horse in this Jordan race once you put your money on first threepeat jordan. Im the one saying neither was better than the other. But Id take a vet over athleticism anyday. Your the one acting as if jordan was a shell that needed to be carried or something.
Honestly, would you really try to argue with Jordan himself if he were to tell you he was only slightly quicker in his 20s when compared to his 30s?[/QUOTE]
Not at all, I just don't think he was as good. There's a reason his '91-93 peak is regarded tops all-time. It took some of the VERY best individual performances from Jordan for the Bulls to advance and win titles.
31.2ppg, 6.6 rebs, 11.4 assists, 2.8 steals, 1.4 blocks, 56.64% FG, 50% 3FG
35.8ppg, 4.8 rebs, 6.5 assists, 1.7 steals, 0.33 blocks, 52.60% FG, 43% 3FG
41.0ppg, 8.5 rebs, 6.3 assists, 1.7 steals, 0.67 blocks, 50.08% FG, 40% 3FG
---------
His numbers vs the Lakers, Blazers and Suns. Are you really suggesting second threepeat Jordan could carry the load '91-93 did?
As for 'arguing' with Jordan himself? The guy thought Kwame Brown and Adam Morrison were franchise players. I don't take what players say as gospel.
[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]Not at all, I just don't think he was as good. There's a reason his '91-93 peak is regarded tops all-time. It took some of the VERY best individual performances from Jordan for the Bulls to advance and win titles.
31.2ppg, 6.6 rebs, 11.4 assists, 2.8 steals, 1.4 blocks, 56.64% FG, 50% 3FG
35.8ppg, 4.8 rebs, 6.5 assists, 1.7 steals, 0.33 blocks, 52.60% FG, 43% 3FG
41.0ppg, 8.5 rebs, 6.3 assists, 1.7 steals, 0.67 blocks, 50.08% FG, 40% 3FG
---------
His numbers vs the Lakers, Blazers and Suns. Are you really suggesting second threepeat Jordan could carry the load '91-93 did?
As for 'arguing' with Jordan himself? The guy thought Kwame Brown and Adam Morrison were franchise players. I don't take what players say as gospel.[/QUOTE]
How much of his performance can be directly attributed to the teams he played ability to play defense an style?
Take for instance the washington bullets he went up against in 97. He avg 37/6/6 on 63% shooting. They like the lakers and especially the suns were extremely suspect defensively. None of those teams were on the level defensively of the Sonics, Jazz (who also made it a point to eliminante any kind of easy transistion buckets, and kept the games in the half court), the Heat, Pacers and Hawks etc.
How many teams did the Bulls play during the first threepeat that really dedicated themselves to defense the way teams did during the second threepeat? Off the top? Only one. And that would be the knicks. And not the 91 knicks the bulls beat in the first round. Im talking about the 92 and even more the 93 knicks. Heres Jordan percentages vs the knicks in 93. 10/27, 12/32, 3/18, 18/30, 11/24, and 8/24 for 40%. Why did he shoot so bad? In my opinion it was because the knicks slowed the game down, and were commited to playing defense. Another point of emphasis in that knicks scouting report was to minimze easy transition buckets.
Honestly, the knicks were the only team that Id would consider to be a great defensive team that the bulls played in the early 90s. The Pistons were a great defensive team too, but they still tried to get out and run. Which allowed for the Bulls to runs too. He shot 47% vs the knicks in 92.
Like i said, there wasnt really much difference between the threepeat Jordans the facts bear it out
96 Jordan was 90% of what first 3 peat Jordan was.
I think the 2nd threepeat teams executed better, while the 1st threepeat teams were more athletic.
[QUOTE=eliteballer]96 Jordan was 90% of what first 3 peat Jordan was.
I think the 2nd threepeat teams executed better, while the 1st threepeat teams were more athletic.[/QUOTE]
Really? Do you say this cuz of Jordans age? I jus dont see how anyone else was more athletic.
Harper>Armstrong
Pippen=Pippen
Rodman>Grant. Phil Jackson said Rodman was the most athletic player he ever coached
Longley>Cartwright
Kerr=Paxson
Kukoc>Levingston
B. Williams>S. Williams
Caffey>King
Wennington=Perdue
Buechler>Hanson
Brown>Tucker
I just dont see how or why people say the FTP Bulls were more athletic than the STP Bulls
96 Jordan was 32 at the beginning of the season with 8 years of NBA ball on his legs, checkout these dunks:
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu-9-c2sUoY[/url]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1mcuyoOWB8&t=6m18s[/url]
He wasn't as athletic as before but he was stronger, better footwork, and a stronger fadeaway.