Bill Simmons: "96 Bulls are not a top-10 All-time and are worse than the '01 Lakers"

The real question is: could Phil Jackson outcoach himself?

DUNN DUNN DUNNNNNNNNNNNNN

not top 10 all-time? bull****.

but 2001 lakers would definitely have chance against them. at least. although '96 bulls are one of best defensive teams ever, shaq would still destroy them in the paint. even prime jordan would have a very hard time matching shaq's production. bulls' role players are probably better, but NO ONE could guard shaq back then. it would come to jordan vs. shaq, but it would be a very tough matchup IMO, that could go either way. another important factor would be rodman - would he be able to annoy shaq and get under skin, possibly draw some charges? if he would, bulls would have a clear upper hand. but, who knows:confusedshrug:

and showtime lakers and '86 celtics are definitely better than '96 bulls. you don't have to consider bird or magic better than jordan to conclude this.

bird, mchale, parish, johnson > jordan & pippen

kareem, magic, worthy > jordan & pippen

you know, I'm watching NBA TV right now and they're showing the 83 finals.. the one where Magic choked all serise and the Lakers got spanked/swept by the Sixers.

Now that I think about it, despite how great those teams are, they've all choked/got outplayed/DESTROYED at one point or another on the big stage.... Celtics by Pistons, Lakers by Pistons, Lakers by Sixers, Lakers by Celtics, Celtics by Sixers, etc, etc.

yeah, I know the usual defense is "both Celtics and Lakers are very, very good teams so they tend to have games where they destroy the others"

But what about Sixers and Pistons?

You're telling me, somehow, the Bulls utter dominance (6-0 in finals, only been pushed to game 7 twice during their six year run) has to be TOTALLY discounted just because their competition was apparently "weaker", while guys like Magic and Bird get free pass, even though one year they're good and next year they could get spanked/destroyed?

And to IBleedCelticGreen, be reasonable. I dont think the Bulls could beat the Celtics either, but it wouldn't be as bad as you make it out to be. One thing I love about people dissing the Bulls is that they always say "The Bulls wouldn't be able to guard so and so", such as you saying "the bulls wouldn't be able to guard McHale or Bird".... but yet you guys always convieniently ignore this guy named, MICHAEL JORDAN.

You say Pip wouldn't be able to guard Bird? Well who the hell is gonna guard Jordan? And for the record, Jordan is better than Bird on offense, and Pip is better than DJ on defense.

I'm not saying the Bulls would win, but why do you guys always convieniently ignore Jordan? I always hear "who on the Bulls would guard Magic? Kareem?" and recently "Who on the Bulls would guard Duncan? Tony Parker?"

yet all those same guys don't answer "who would guard jordan?"

And for the record, Jordan would be a tougher matchup for ANY TEAM IN THE HISTORY OF THE LEAGUE than Bird, Magic, Kareem, Duncan and Tony F*cking Parker ever would.

Look, anytime you guys pull the Bulls against whoever matchup. Just KNOW THIS: Jordan would torch whoever was guarding him WORSE than Magic/Bird/Duncan would torch any member of the Bulls. That's FACT. Bird wouldn't torch Pippen worse than Jordan would torch DJ. Duncan wouldn't torch Rodman worse than Jordan would torch Bowen. Magic wouuldn't torch Ron Harper worse than Jordan would torch Byron Scott. Bill Russell wouldn't torch Longley worse than whoever would be guarding Jordan.

[QUOTE=joe]did i ever, at any point, in ANY post that i've EVER made on this or ANY web site, say that MJ is not the GOAT? NO.

what i said was, the fact that you guys are so threatened by the mere mention of an MJ-led team being beaten, especially by a team that was so talented (Like the 2001 Lakers), might mean that it's time you get some help for your complete homerism of MJ.

And you are a prime example of this. You probably scanned my post, seen that it was Anti-MJ, or at the very least Anti-Bulls, and immediately jumped to the Aid of your Idol, defending his status as GOAT. well guess what buddy? I never said he wasn't GOAT.[/QUOTE]
****ing hell somebody else gets it! there is absolutely no reason why bulls would not have had a run for there money against the 01 lakers, seriously prime shaq and up n coming kobe. would have gone 2 7 with kobe making the last shot on MJ's head.

I've said it for years that the first 3peat Bulls were definately better the 2nd 3peat Bulls. The defensive ball pressure especailly in Chicago stadium was outstanding.

[QUOTE=IBLEEDGREEN43]the 90's bulls.. would literally be like the 2007 cavs in the finals, against the 86 celtics....[/QUOTE]

:oldlol:

Let's not get carried away there, buddy.

2001 Lakers - the greatest team ever assambled. Period. :bowdown:

:rockon:

Just playing. I'm not old enough to know where to rank them all time but that team was freaking dominant and powerful.
Throughout the playoffs Shaq was at 30 ppg and 15 rpg while Kobe was flerting around with numbers like 30-7-6.

Seriously, can a duo get better than that? Hardly.

We can only feel sorry because they lost that one game to the Sixers that they were supposed to win.

Still, the greatest playoff record of all time.

Give it up for the 2001 Los Angeles Lakers. :applause: :bowdown:

****, I sound like LeBron23.

I agree with Bill

the 2001 Lakers didn't lose a game in the Western Conference playoffs that year, they only lost once in the playoffs, game one to the Sixers.

Shaq was the most dominant force in the league, gasp, dare I say more dominant than '96 MJ.

He was get over it.

While it's popular to praise Shaq and Jordan and unpopular to praise Kobe, let's just remember his playoff numbers that year.

29.4 ppg
7.3 rpg
6.1 apg

Those are comparable numbers to Jordan's regular season numbers in 1996

29.6 ppg
5.9 rpg
4.3 apg

In the playoffs, Jordan was at

30.7 ppg
4.9 rpg
4.1 apg

Just throwing it out there. Just to show how good the 2001 Lakers actually were. Shaq was pretty much at his best while Kobe was averaging Jordan type of numbers and let's not forget that the role players were on top of their task too. Just a shame they lost that one game to Philly. 15-0 would've made a great statement, this way that team isn't nearly as appreciated as it should be.

this years spurs team would kick both their asses. :rockon:

Kobe is not comparable to Mj... In that 2001 run, kobe was not a real problem... McKie and Bell dealt with him pretty well when the series was in doubt.. He got off after it was apparent the 6ers couldnt outmanuever the lakers...

Shaq destroyed us and when he wasnt smashing mutombo's face with his elbows (and blaming mutombo for flopping at the same time) Fischer and Horry were killing us from the arc..

Game 1 - we won
Game 2 - we lost at the very end on a Fischer 3ptr
Game 3 - we lost at the end on an Horry 3 ptr.

by then it was clear we werent gonna be able to even keep competing against these guys... Snow & McKie had broken bones in their feet..Mutombo broke his finger...Ty Hill was invisible since the playoff began, and George Lynch was sidelined with something broken...they were all fading fast and though Iverson was playing his ass off, he couldnt do it all

Shaq dismantled us....... Kobe was hardly Mj or any thing comparable



And No that 2001 Laker team could not beat the 96 Bulls in a series... that Bull team was 72-10 and they would have taken the lakers to the wood shed and whupped their tails

[QUOTE=OneWay]While it's popular to praise Shaq and Jordan and unpopular to praise Kobe, let's just remember his playoff numbers that year.

29.4 ppg
7.3 rpg
6.1 apg

Those are comparable numbers to Jordan's regular season numbers in 1996

29.6 ppg
5.9 rpg
4.3 apg

In the playoffs, Jordan was at

30.7 ppg
4.9 rpg
4.1 apg

Just throwing it out there. Just to show how good the 2001 Lakers actually were. Shaq was pretty much at his best while Kobe was averaging Jordan type of numbers and let's not forget that the role players were on top of their task too. Just a shame they lost that one game to Philly. 15-0 would've made a great statement, this way that team isn't nearly as appreciated as it should be.[/QUOTE]


Jordan got those numbers while being doubled and tripled. Kobe got thsoe numbers while teams worried about Shaq probably TWICE as much as they did Kobe (not even an exaggeration.. Shaq from 2000 to 2001 required that much defensive attention), meaning Kobe got those against single coverage--sometimes spot doubles here and there.

I am a Jordan fan but I have no problem hearing "Jordan's Bulls wouldn't have beaten the 2001 Lakers" or 86 Celtics, Magic's Lakers, whatever. Because I feel Jordan's cast didn't measure up to what Shaq had, what MAgic had, what Bird had, etc. I don't even consider it a knock on Jordan that his Bulls would have lost to Bird's Celtics, Bird had a f*cking all star team surrounding his ass.

I just want people to acknowledge the fact that Jordan's Bulls would lose because [B]spot 2 through 12 on his team can't measure up to the Lakers and Celtics's 2 thru 12 [/B]. If Jordan had equal cast, he would outplay Magic and BIrd in a 7 game series for sure.

God, you Jordan fans are so sensitive. I just said Kobe was getting MJ type of numbers, I didn't say he was playing better than MJ or anything. And I knew one of you would jump on me instantly.

Anyway, for the 3peat Lakers, I take Shaq over Jordan. He was getting like 28 ppg and 13 rpg those years. Those years are what earned him the title of the MDE.
Still, Kobe and Jordan would've been hella fun to watch but they'd need some post help. Ho Grant or Rodman would've been enough ;)
Give them a reliable post player/defender and I take that team for the sheer excitement and entertainment.

Still Shaq those years...too dominant for words. But so was MJ. Tough call.

[QUOTE=OneWay]
Those are comparable numbers to Jordan's regular season numbers in 1996

29.6 ppg
5.9 rpg
4.3 apg[/QUOTE]

Those numbers are wrong (you're combining some of his '96 and '97 numbers). Jordan's numbers in '96 were 30.4 pts/6.6 reb/4.3 ast/50% FG in 37.7 mpg.

Kobe's numbers were, as you said, 29.4/7.3 reb/6.1 ast/47% FG in 43.4 mpg.


Jordan's numbers over 43.4 mpg (a [b]15%[/b] increase) would be 35.0 pts/7.6/5.0 ast/50%. At age 33. :)


But yes, Kobe put up great numbers that postseason (easily his best playoff run), comparable to Jordan. But he wasn't doing that as the main focus of the defense like Jordan was. Regardless, I agree that that particular version of the Laker team was incredibly tough, and might be favored against Chicago due to Shaq's dominance and the Bulls' interior thinness. However, Jordan always answered the bell to a greater degree than anyone else; I know he'd take the battle with Kobe personally and play his best ball. Still, it'd be a tough series either way.

[QUOTE=EricForman]the 01 team also had guys like JR Rider, Horace Grant, Lindsay Hunter (very good on ball defender) AND Ron Harper.

They were a damn good team.

BUt still, no one beats a angry Jordan. Plus Jordan would have extra motivation to kill Horace Grant. hahah[/QUOTE]
This is in reaction to the ridiculous article by Hollinger. Hollinger thinks that MJ is God, so he showed that the 96 Bulls are the greatest ever by using statistics. Had Hollinger thought that the 01 Lakers were the best ever, he would have put the stats together to prove that.

The 96 Bulls were great, but no way do they beat the 83 Sixers, 85 Lakers, 86 Celtics or 87 Lakers in a 7 game series. Anyone that thinks they would does not know basketball and/or started watching in the 90's.

[QUOTE=vert48]
The 96 Bulls were great, but no way do they beat the 83 Sixers, 85 Lakers, 86 Celtics or 87 Lakers in a 7 game series. Anyone that thinks they would does not know basketball and/or started watching in the 90's.[/QUOTE]

The other teams you listed would definitely be a handful, and Chicago would likely be the underdog in a series. However, I think the Bulls would beat the '83 Sixers since they present almost the ideal defensive matchups against the Sixers' top 4 players: Jordan on Toney, Pip on Dr. J, Rodman on Moses, and Harper on Cheeks. I just can't see the Sixers generating the offense necessary to win with several all-time defenders on them (and an excellent defender in Harper on Cheeks, the weakest of the 4 offensive threats). The same is not true in reverse, however.

[QUOTE] In that 2001 run, kobe was not a real problem... McKie and Bell dealt with him pretty well when the series was in doubt.. He got off after it was apparent the 6ers couldnt outmanuever the lakers...[/QUOTE]

Stop it with the revisionist history. What do you mean "he got off after it was apparent the sixers couldn't outmaneuver the Lakers?" He got off every game after game 1. Game 2...31-8-6. Game 3...32-6-3. Game 4...19-10-9
Game 5...26-6-12.

[QUOTE]Shaq destroyed us and when he wasnt smashing mutombo's face with his elbows (and blaming mutombo for flopping at the same time) Fischer and Horry were killing us from the arc..[/QUOTE]

Shaq did the most damage but it's silly to try to minimize Kobe's contributions that series and pretend that Fisher, Horry or anyone else had more impact.

[QUOTE]Game 1 - we won
Game 2 - we lost at the very end on a Fischer 3ptr
Game 3 - we lost at the end on an Horry 3 ptr.[/QUOTE]

So the Lakers showed their ability to win both blowouts and close games. Your point?


[QUOTE]
by then it was clear we werent gonna be able to even keep competing against these guys... Snow & McKie had broken bones in their feet..Mutombo broke his finger...Ty Hill was invisible since the playoff began, and George Lynch was sidelined with something broken...they were all fading fast and though Iverson was playing his ass off, he couldnt do it all[/QUOTE]

You suggested Kobe only got off "after" it became apparent the Sixers couldn't hang, now you say that became apparent only after game 3. But by game 3 Kobe had already had his two highest scoring games of the series...so which is it?

[QUOTE]Shaq dismantled us....... Kobe was hardly Mj or any thing comparable[/QUOTE]

Right. Kobe's numbers were verrrry pedestrian. :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=Loki]The other teams you listed would definitely be a handful, and Chicago would likely be the underdog in a series. However, I think the Bulls would beat the '83 Sixers since they present almost the ideal defensive matchups against the Sixers' top 4 players: Jordan on Toney, Pip on Dr. J, Rodman on Moses, and Harper on Cheeks. I just can't see the Sixers generating the offense necessary to win with several all-time defenders on them (and an excellent defender in Harper on Cheeks, the weakest of the 4 offensive threats). The same is not true in reverse, however.[/QUOTE]
Did you ever see that Sixers team play?

[quote]Stop it with the revisionist history. What do you mean "he got off after it was apparent the sixers couldn't outmaneuver the Lakers?" He got off every game after game 1. Game 2...31-8-6. Game 3...32-6-3. Game 4...19-10-9
Game 5...26-6-12.[/quote]

19 & 26 is not getting off... Kobe talked a better game than he played, and he got embarassed by Raja Bell in game 1... Laker would have lost the series if was all about what kobe was doing...... Like I said Kobe was [b]not[/b] Mj or anything close...

[quote]Shaq did the most damage but it's silly to try to minimize Kobe's contributions that series and pretend that Fisher, Horry or anyone else had more impact.[/quote]

Shaq is the reason the lakers won the series(not to mention the reason why they even made the finals) Fischer and Horry were the ones killing us with their perimeter shooting off Shaq'a great passin... Kobe was running his mouth more than anything else

[quote]You suggested Kobe only got off "after" it became apparent the Sixers couldn't hang, now you say that became apparent only after game 3. But by game 3 Kobe had already had his two highest scoring games of the series...so which is it? [/quote]



Kobe scored pts when the lakers were rolling....he didnt decide any of the game...he made no clutch plays and he wasnt the reason the Lakers won the series... the reason the lakers won the series was because Shaq was poundng us and then passing out to the guys on the perimeter and they were hitting the shots......


take your panties out your v*gina laker logic....I didnt insult your boyfriend

[QUOTE]Kobe talked a better game than he played, and he got embarassed by Raja Bell in game 1... Laker would have lost the series if was all about what kobe was doing......[/QUOTE]

He averaged 25/8/6 for the series on a team where NO other player on the team outside of Shaq averaged more than 10/6/4..and he "talked a better game than he played"?

[QUOTE] Like I said Kobe was [b]not[/b] Mj or anything close... [/QUOTE]

You don't need to say Kobe = MJ to give him due credit for his play for the series.

[QUOTE]
Shaq is the reason the lakers won the series(not to mention the reason why they even made the finals) Fischer and Horry were the ones killing us with their perimeter shooting off Shaq'a great passin... Kobe was running his mouth more than anything else[/QUOTE]

Shaq was the dominant player on the team - no one disputes that. He didn't singlehandedly beat Philly or anyone else, and it's always amazing the idiotic lengths people like you who don't like Kobe will go to pretend otherwise.


[QUOTE]Kobe scored pts when the lakers were rolling....he didnt decide any of the game...he made no clutch plays and he wasnt the reason the Lakers won the series... the reason the lakers won the series was because Shaq was poundng us and then passing out to the guys on the perimeter and they were hitting the shots......[/QUOTE]

He scored his points when he scored them....and every game after game one if the Lakers were rolling he had a large part to do with it. Does it really make you feel better to pretend otherwise?

[QUOTE]
take your panties out your v*gina laker logic....I didnt insult your boyfriend[/QUOTE]

You'd have less trouble distinguishing between men and women if you spent more time around females, homothug.

Like I said before you busted in with tears in your eyes :cry: Kobe is not Mj nor is he comparable..... I also said kobe wasnt the reason the lakers won the series....they would have lost the series if it was up to kobe (they wouldnt even have been there)

[quote]
You'd have less trouble distinguishing between men and women if you spent more time around females, homothug.[/quote]

gotta be the corniest comeback Ive ever seen here :applause:

Spent more time around females :oldlol: I get more p*ssy than the law allows .... I know a sensitive broad when I see one..... watch your mouth young lady

[QUOTE][Like I said before you busted in with tears in your eyes :cry: Kobe is not Mj nor is he comparable..... I also said kobe wasnt the reason the lakers won the series....they would have lost the series if it was up to kobe (they wouldnt even have been there)[/QUOTE]

Let's just recap.

I say: Kobe played a huge, if secondary role in the 2001 championship.

You say: Kobe was basically a non-factor who talked more than he produced and "only" contributed at some indeterminate point after game 3 when "it became clear the Sixers couldn't keep up," and [I]after[/I] he'd already had his two biggest scoring games of the series.

..and yet I'm being "sensitive." You can't even look objectively at the series even 6 years later. :applause:

[QUOTE]I get more p*ssy than the law allows [/QUOTE]

:oldlol:

That was great.

Personally I have to agree with LL on this one; Kobe played very well for the most part. He did pretty well on Iverson as well; although he did get beat several times off the dribble, his recovery was on the mark blocking numerous shots from behind. It helps that Shaq was there, but it was still nice defense. Easily could have given up on the play but he stuck with it.

Give Kobe credit for his play. He did what was expected from him and then some.

The Bulls would have more trouble with the '01 Lakers than with the 80s Celtics/Lakers/Sixers ... I know some people are going to flip out at that statement but I feel it's true.

The Celtics/Lakers/Sixers didn't have one offensive force that absolutely was as physically wearing as Shaq. The '01 Lakers I think you could also say were better defensively than the 80s Lakers or Celts.

That said .... the Bulls had a tendancy to play very well against Shaq (see the '96 playoffs) and a prime Pippen is about as good of a defender as you could create to disrupt Kobe. The Lakers are flying when things go their way but often times when faced with adversity they would fold, unless they got bailed out by mistake-prone teams/chokers like the Trail Blazers or Kings. So it would be interesting how smooth thier offense would run with Kobe being shadowed (like the '04 Pistons did to him) and how long it would take for Rodman to get under Shaq's skin.

I think the Bulls would live with Shaq getting 30/40, but would focus on taking Kobe and Fisher in particular out of their rythmn. That's just how the Bulls operated, they'd zero in one 1 or 2 components of a team's offense and take those away.

It's also funny how basketball "purists" somehow always forget the 1989-90 Pistons in these debates. Those teams did beat the Celtics and Lakers, now you can argue there were injuries there and the Lakers/Celts had run out of gas by then, but I have to think these Pistons teams would've given the Lakers/Celtics all they could handle if you let them play those teams from a few years prior. The Bulls were better than those Pistons teams IMO.

[QUOTE=vert48]Did you ever see that Sixers team play?[/QUOTE]

Did you read what I wrote? I don't see how having possibly the [b]ideal[/b] defensive matchups at the Sixers' 4 biggest offensive positions isn't a huge advantage for Chicago in that hypothetical matchup. Again, I feel that Chicago would win a series vs. the '83 Sixers, but wouldn't be favored vs. the 80's Lakers/Celts (though they could win).

[B]Quick listing of the 11 "Greatest" Teams of All-Time (No order)[/B]
[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11421[/url]

(1 Team per Franchise core)

[CENTER][B][SIZE="5"]
1967 Philadeplhia 76ers
[SIZE="3"]68-13[/SIZE][/SIZE][/B]
[IMG]http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/nba/phil76/Wilt76.jpg[/IMG]

Players: Wilt Chamberlain (Top 10 Player of All-Time)...Hal Greet (Top 10 SG of All-Time)...Billy Cunningham (Top 10 SF of All-Time)...Chet Walker (7 Time All-Star)...Wali Jones (13ppg)...Luke Jackson (1 Time All-Star)...



[B][SIZE="5"]1986 Boston Celtics[/SIZE][/B]
[B][SIZE="3"]67-15
[/SIZE][/B]
[IMG]http://i.tsn.com/i/o/vault/nba/1986.jpg[/IMG]

Players: Larry Bird (GOAT SF), Kevin McHale (Top 10 PF of All-Time), Robert Parrish (HOF), Dennis Johnson (9 Time All-Defensive Selection), Danny Ainge (1 Time All-Star)



[B][SIZE="5"]1971 Milwaukee Bucks[/SIZE]
[SIZE="3"]66-16[/SIZE][/B]
[IMG]http://www.historycentral.com/Bio/people/images/abdul-jabbar.gif[/IMG]

[B]Players:[/B] Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (Top 10 Player of All-Time), Oscar Robertson (Top 10 Player of All-Time), Bod Dandrige (4 Time All-Star), Jim McGlocklin (1 Time All-Star)...



[B][SIZE="5"]2001 L.A. Lakers
[SIZE="3"]56-26[/SIZE]
[/SIZE][/B]
[IMG]http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/040529/040529_kobe_shaq_vmed.widec.jpg[/IMG]

[B]Players:[/B] Shaquille O'Neal (Top 10 Player of All-Time), Kobe Bryant (Top 10 SG of All-Time), Derek Fisher (Solid Roleplayer), Robert Horry (Mr. Clutch)...



[SIZE="5"][B]1983 Philadephia 76ers[/B][/SIZE]
[B][SIZE="3"]65-17[/SIZE][/B]
[IMG]http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/nba/phil76/MosesPhl.jpg[/IMG]

Players: Moses Malone (Top 10 Center of All-Time), Julius Erving (Top 5 SF of All-Time), Bobby Jones (9 Time All-Defensive), Maurice Cheeks (5 Time All-Defensive), Andrew Toney (2 Time All-Star)...[/CENTER]

[center]
[B][SIZE="5"]1972 L.A. Lakers
[SIZE="3"]69-13[/SIZE]
[/SIZE][/B]
[IMG]http://www.nba.com/media/lakers/history_west_1972.jpg[/IMG]

[B]Players[/B]: Jerry West (Top 10 Player of All-Time)...Gail Goodrich (HOF)...Jim Mcmillan (19ppg)...Wilt Chamberlain (Top 10 Player of All-Time)...Happy Haristion (13ppg and 13rpg)...



[B][SIZE="5"]1989 Detroit Pistons
[SIZE="3"]63-19[/SIZE][/SIZE][/B]
[IMG]http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/nba/detroit/isiahdet.jpg[/IMG]

[B]Players:[/B] Isiah Thomas (Top 5 PG of All-Time), Joe Dumars (HOF), Mark Agguire (3 Time All-Star), Vinnie Johnson (13ppg), Bill Laimbeer (4 Time All-Star), Dennis Rodman (8 Time All-Defensive)....


[B][SIZE="5"]
1965 Boston Celtics[/SIZE][/B]
[B][SIZE="3"]62-18[/SIZE][/B]
[IMG]http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/nba/boston/RussellBOs2.jpg[/IMG]

[B]Players:[/B] Bill Russell (Top 10 Player of All-Time), Sam Jones (HOF), John Havlicek (Top 5 SF of All-Time), Tom Heinosohn (HOF), KC Jones (HOF), Tom Sanders (Defensive Stopper)...Willie Naules (4 Time All-Star)...


[B]
[SIZE="5"]1996 Chicago Bulls[/SIZE]
[SIZE="3"]72-10[/SIZE]
[/B]
[IMG]http://www.nba.com/media/bulls/jordan_050819.jpg[/IMG]

[B]Players:[/B] Michael Jordan (GOAT), Scottie Pippen (Top 5 SF of All-Time), Dennis Rodman (8 Time All-Defensive), Toni Kukoc (13ppg), Ron Harper (Defensive Stopper)...



[B][SIZE="5"]1970 New York Knicks[/SIZE]
[SIZE="3"]60-22[/SIZE][/B]
[IMG]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/events/1998/playoffs/moments_gallery/images/reed.jpg[/IMG]

[B]Players:[/B] Willis Reed (HOF), Walt Frazier (Top 10 PG of All-Time), Dave DebBusschere (6 Time All-Defensive 1st), D!ck Barnett (1 Time All-Star), Bill Bradley (1 Time All-Star)...


[B]
[SIZE="5"]1987 L.A. Lakers[/SIZE]
[SIZE="3"]65-17[/SIZE][/B]
[IMG]http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/nba/lala/KareemLA2.jpg[/IMG]

[B]Players:[/B] Magic Johnson (GOAT PG)...Kareem Abdul-Abdul Jabbar (Top 5 Center of All-Time)...James Worthy (HOF)...Byron Scott (17ppg)...Michael Cooper (8 Time All-Defensive Selection)...



[/CENTER]

Now with that said.

The teams up there that could give the Bulls some problems are:


67 Sixers
71 Bucks
01 Lakers

All 3 of them had a dominating force inside. So did the 86 Celtics kind of, and 72 Lakers, but none like the 3 up there...


With that said, the Bulls might beat all of them, but you can make a case with basically any of those 11 listed as being the GOAT

Personally I think Kobe's playoff performances have actually regressed since 2001.

In the 01-02, he averaged his second or third highest point total for playoffs, but playoff highs for rebounds and assists to go with it, and his second highest FG% for his playoff career (2006's 1st round exit to Phoenix is his highest).

I think he benefitted a lot when he played within Phil's system and played off Shaq. When he tried to get away from that, not coincidentally, the Lakers stopped winning championships.

this thread is too good not to bump

[QUOTE=joe]You guys are just so in love with MJ and his legacy that you're afraid to admit that he would ever faulter to any team. you didn't even listen to his arguments, which were basically..

The league was falling apart that year, talent wise. All the good teams were on the downside of their "prime," and MJs bulls were the best team left.

Furthermore, while you're busy defending the greatness of MJ, bill simmons even said that the 92 Bulls were a great team, just that he didn't think the 98 bulls were a top-10 team

You guys are so, so, so competely sickening with your MJ homerism. Just stop, everyone on this site. Just stop.

When someone states that they think MJ's Bulls could be beaten by a Prime-Shaq led Championship team that went 15-1 in a VERY tough western conference finals... and you are actually OFFENDED and say that that person has lost all credibility, i think you need to see a therapist. its very sad, some of the MJ love that goes on here.[/QUOTE]

amen.
oh, and god forbid you think MJ played in a soft, weakened era!

Bill Simmons is great when it comes to dealing and ranking players. But teams, he fails. But he is good talking about individual players.

I didn't read this whole thread but I thought it was pretty well accepted that the 87 Lakers were the best team of all time. Almost every poll I have seen put up on this topic usually has them winning.

Stop making funny comments, Bill.:sleeping

[QUOTE=EricForman]One thing I love about people dissing the Bulls is that they always say "The Bulls wouldn't be able to guard so and so", such as you saying "the bulls wouldn't be able to guard McHale or Bird".... but yet you guys always convieniently ignore this guy named, MICHAEL JORDAN.

[...]

And for the record, Jordan would be a tougher matchup for ANY TEAM IN THE HISTORY OF THE LEAGUE than Bird, Magic, Kareem, Duncan and Tony F*cking Parker ever would.

Look, anytime you guys pull the Bulls against whoever matchup. Just KNOW THIS: Jordan would torch whoever was guarding him WORSE than Magic/Bird/Duncan would torch any member of the Bulls. That's FACT. Bird wouldn't torch Pippen worse than Jordan would torch DJ. Duncan wouldn't torch Rodman worse than Jordan would torch Bowen. Magic wouuldn't torch Ron Harper worse than Jordan would torch Byron Scott. Bill Russell wouldn't torch Longley worse than whoever would be guarding Jordan.[/QUOTE]

You know... does [I]anyone[/I] else other than me remember Jordan in the Finals in 1996, which is the year in question? Jordan was held to his worst Finals performance of his career, and the only sub-30 ppg Finals of his career, a career-low 27.3 points on 41.5 percent shooting. Anyone but me remember that in Game 2 in which Jordan shot [B][I]9-for-22[/I][/B] ([B]40.9 percent[/B]), that it was [B]Dennis Rodman[/B]'s rebounding that won that game for Chicago? (20 rebounds, NBA Finals-record 11 on the offensive glass)

[QUOTE][B]Hershey Hawkins:[/B] “Rodman was definitely the difference.”

[B]Vincent Askew:[/B] “Rodman killed us."

[B]Sonics coach George Karl:[/B] “There is no question he was the MVP of the game. His offensive rebounds hurt us. A lot of possessions, the momentum of the game, the style of the game, and even the scoreboard might have changed.”[/QUOTE]

Anybody else remember that in the deciding Game 6, Jordan shot an un-Jordanesque [B][I]5-for-19[/I][/B] ([B]26.3 percent[/B] :eek: )? Jordan shot [I]26.3 percent[/I] in a deciding game? :eek: (Can anyone else remember the last time Jordan had a game like that in a deciding game, let alone in the [I]Finals[/I]?) Did everyone block this from their memories? Anyone else other than me remember that it was Rodman's 19 rebounds and Finals-record-tying (for the second time) 11 offensive rebounds that won that game for the Bulls?

[QUOTE][B]Sonics' coach George Karl:[/B] "As you evaluate the series, Dennis Rodman won two basketball games. We controlled Dennis for four games. [U]But Game 2 and tonight, he was the reason they were successful[/U].”[/QUOTE]

Anyone else remember that if not for Rodman, the Bulls would've lost those two games in which Jordan stunk it up and the Sonics would've won that series? Payton was the best defensive guard Jordan faced in the Finals, and he had his worst Finals performance. I think people are just taking the memory of Jordan in general rather than the [B][U]1996 Jordan[/U][/B]. So you can't just say offhand that Jordan would destroy whoever he was matched up against, since IN THAT SEASON, DURING THOSE FINALS, Jordan didn't "destroy" who was defending him, so it [I]would[/I] be possible for a team who had a Dennis Johnson or a Michael Cooper to "stand a chance." (by the way, anyone remember what happened the game [I]after[/I] Jordan's much talked about 63-point game against the Celtics in the playoffs? Anyone but me remember DJ held Jordan to 21 and the Bulls were eliminated?)

Be [B]objective[/B] in these discussions rather than rabidly taking offense at the suggestion that someone or some team could actually possibly best Jordan.

Payton's defense, while huge, was by no means solely responsible for Jordan's shooting in the '96 Finals. He was bricking [b]wide open[/b] baseline 17-footers, layups, and offensive putbacks, which are usually automatic for him. His shot was just off the entire series for whatever reason. He wouldn't have shot 50% or anything had he not been ice cold on top of Payton's great defense (and Seattles constant swarming traps on MJ), but I'd say about 45-47% from having watched the series.

Honestly, I wish people would just watch the series rather than assuming that Payton did some sort of job on Jordan. He played excellent defense, probably the best one could. But it was a combination of the constant doubles/traps, Payton's defense, Jordan being ICE cold, and his teammates being ice cold as well, which allowed Seattle to keep pressure on Jordan because no one else was making them pay (Pippen/Kukoc/Kerr were a combined 36% from the field that series). All these things conspired to produce a relatively poor performance (by Jordan's standards).

[quote]by the way, anyone remember what happened the game after Jordan's much talked about 63-point game against the Celtics in the playoffs? Anyone but me remember DJ held Jordan to 21 and the Bulls were eliminated?)[/quote]

Yeah, we remember it. 49 followed by 63 followed by a 19 point near triple-double (19/10/9) against a perennial first team defender and the best defensive team in the league, with no help. Sounds like a pretty good series to me.

They are top 10 for sure but that 96 Bulls team was playing in one of the weakest eras of NBA history. '94/'95-'98/'99 was about as bad as I can remember the NBA ever being.

With that said, those Bulls teams were outstanding. They were great no matter what era. But their competition around the league was, IMO, at an all time low in their 2nd set of Three Titles.

[QUOTE=Soundwave]Bill Simmons: Read my article. Please read my article. I'll add more controversey.

You can argue the '96 Bulls aren't the best ever (though you'd be in the minority), but not even top 10 ... gimme a break.

The NBA was soft in 1996? The '96 Orlando Magic or the '96 Sonics would tear the 2007 NBA apart. The '96 Jazz, Rockets, Pacers, Knicks, and Suns were nothing to scoff at either ... all of those teams if put into 2007 would have a pretty strong shot at getting to the Finals. The 95-96 Miami Heat who were the 8th seed in the 1996 Eastern Conference could probably be the no.1 or no.2 seed in the 2007 NBA Eastern Conference.

Teams like the 2007 Lakers or Warriors wouldn't even make the playoffs in 1996, and half the East at least wouldn't make it.[/QUOTE]


yes yes. true true true. :applause:

[QUOTE=Loki]Honestly, I wish people would just watch the series rather than assuming that Payton did some sort of job on Jordan.[/QUOTE]

I watched the series when it happened, thank you very much, as well as the entire championship run. The point is that everyone acts as if Jordan would torch whatever poor, hapless, unfortunate soul who had the misfortune of being matched up against him. He didn't do it in the season in question on the biggest stage, so why does everyone assume he'd blow anyone else out of the water? That was his worst Finals by far, and if not for Rodman's offensive rebounding--which made up for no one being able to make a shot, the Bulls would've lost that series. So why does everyone act like they were invincible and couldn't possibly be defeated by any team in history, when it took record rebounding performances by Rodman to keep them from losing to Seattle, who aren't an all-time great team? That's all I'm saying. A little objectivity rather than simply making a blanket statement that no team in history could compete with the Bulls, and that Jordan would decimate his defender.