Printable View
[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.