great Scottie Pippen interview about 1995-1996 Chicago Bulls

[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.

[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]

Repped. :applause: :applause: :applause:

[QUOTE=Knoe Itawl]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.[/QUOTE]

You're exactly right on that Knoe. I grew up during the 80's and 90's and it funny how the criteria for who the greatest ever is has changed. I grew up and still live in L.A but have been a Bulls fan since the 80's.

And at first the argument was that Jordan<Magic cause Jordan had no titles. Then at the end of the 91 season it was Magic>Jordan cause Jordan only had one ring and Magic had 5 and Jordan would never go back to back.

By the end of the 93' 3 peat it was Magic>Jordan cause Magic had 5 titles and Jordan only had three. Mind you at this time there was no talk about better competition or subjective stuff like that. Laker fans were only interested in solid numbers.(cause they had the advantage there)

By the end of the 97 season, most Laker fans would admit (although begrudgingly) that Jordan> Magic. But the Lakers were better than the Bulls cause 5 titles in the 80's>>> 5 titles in the 90's.

It wasn't till 98 when the Bulls won their 6th title and pulled off a second 3 peat that this subjective notion came about that the 80's were the "greatest, most stupendous, brilliant, competitive, most magical era ever". And you know why this came about? Cause in 98 math wasn't on the Lakers fan side anymore. They loved math when 5>1. But in 98 when 6>5 and 72-10>69-13, well thats when everything went from concrete to subjective.

Lakers fans have hated the Bulls ever since. And even though they hated and therefore disrespected the Bulls, they were happy when most of the Bulls coaching staff and 2 of their championship starters came to their team. They [B]wanted[/B] so desperately for Kobe to be better than Jordan. Kobe represented their revenge of Jordan passing their hero Magic. Thats why to this day even when it's clear to everyone on the planet that Jordan>Kobe, Laker fans still can't say that. They have to add something stupid at the end like Jordan>Kobe but Kobe is better at clipping his toenails.

[QUOTE=puppychili]You're exactly right on that Knoe. I grew up during the 80's and 90's and it funny how the criteria for who the greatest ever is has changed. I grew up and still live in L.A but have been a Bulls fan since the 80's.

And at first the argument was that Jordan<Magic cause Jordan had no titles. Then at the end of the 91 season it was Magic>Jordan cause Jordan only had one ring and Magic had 5 and Jordan would never go back to back.

By the end of the 93' 3 peat it was Magic>Jordan cause Magic had 5 titles and Jordan only had three. Mind you at this time there was no talk about better competition or subjective stuff like that. Laker fans were only interested in solid numbers.(cause they had the advantage there)

By the end of the 97 season, most Laker fans would admit (although begrudgingly) that Jordan> Magic. But the Lakers were better than the Bulls cause 5 titles in the 80's>>> 5 titles in the 90's.

It wasn't till 98 when the Bulls won their 6th title and pulled off a second 3 peat that this subjective notion came about that the 80's were the "greatest, most stupendous, brilliant, competitive, most magical era ever". And you know why this came about? Cause in 98 math wasn't on the Lakers fan side anymore. They loved math when 5>1. But in 98 when 6>5 and 72-10>69-13, well thats when everything went from concrete to subjective.

Lakers fans have hated the Bulls ever since. And even though they hated and therefore disrespected the Bulls, they were happy when most of the Bulls coaching staff and 2 of their championship starters came to their team. They [B]wanted[/B] so desperately for Kobe to be better than Jordan. Kobe represented their revenge of Jordan passing their hero Magic. Thats why to this day even when it's clear to everyone on the planet that Jordan>Kobe, Laker fans still can't say that. They have to add something stupid at the end like Jordan>Kobe but Kobe is better at clipping his toenails.[/QUOTE]

Oh for sure, there definitely is that breed of Laker fan out there.

The funny thing is Laker fans are the worst bandwagon jumpers, I remember in '91 a lot of them started cheering for the Bulls while the series was still going.

I'll be honest ... Magic is a great player, but I think Jordan probably was always better. There was a Youtube clip here to a 1984 game between Team USA (which had Jordan + Ewing + Sam Perkins) and an NBA All-Star group featuring Magic and Isiah. Jordan just dominated that game and was the best player on the floor already at that point -- at this is before he even played a single NBA game.

Fact is Jordan had to shift his way through a lot of crappy teams and had to wait for Pippen to get out of his "migraine" phase.

[QUOTE=puppychili]You're exactly right on that Knoe. I grew up during the 80's and 90's and it funny how the criteria for who the greatest ever is has changed. I grew up and still live in L.A but have been a Bulls fan since the 80's.

And at first the argument was that Jordan<Magic cause Jordan had no titles. Then at the end of the 91 season it was Magic>Jordan cause Jordan only had one ring and Magic had 5 and Jordan would never go back to back.

By the end of the 93' 3 peat it was Magic>Jordan cause Magic had 5 titles and Jordan only had three. Mind you at this time there was no talk about better competition or subjective stuff like that. Laker fans were only interested in solid numbers.(cause they had the advantage there)

By the end of the 97 season, most Laker fans would admit (although begrudgingly) that Jordan> Magic. But the Lakers were better than the Bulls cause 5 titles in the 80's>>> 5 titles in the 90's.

It wasn't till 98 when the Bulls won their 6th title and pulled off a second 3 peat that this subjective notion came about that the 80's were the "greatest, most stupendous, brilliant, competitive, most magical era ever". And you know why this came about? Cause in 98 math wasn't on the Lakers fan side anymore. They loved math when 5>1. But in 98 when 6>5 and 72-10>69-13, well thats when everything went from concrete to subjective.

Lakers fans have hated the Bulls ever since. And even though they hated and therefore disrespected the Bulls, they were happy when most of the Bulls coaching staff and 2 of their championship starters came to their team. They [B]wanted[/B] so desperately for Kobe to be better than Jordan. Kobe represented their revenge of Jordan passing their hero Magic. Thats why to this day even when it's clear to everyone on the planet that Jordan>Kobe, Laker fans still can't say that. They have to add something stupid at the end like Jordan>Kobe but Kobe is better at clipping his toenails.[/QUOTE]


wow chili, you just summarized abiut 20 years of arguing with laker fans.

[QUOTE=puppychili]You're exactly right on that Knoe. I grew up during the 80's and 90's and it funny how the criteria for who the greatest ever is has changed. I grew up and still live in L.A but have been a Bulls fan since the 80's.

And at first the argument was that Jordan<Magic cause Jordan had no titles. Then at the end of the 91 season it was Magic>Jordan cause Jordan only had one ring and Magic had 5 and Jordan would never go back to back.

By the end of the 93' 3 peat it was Magic>Jordan cause Magic had 5 titles and Jordan only had three. Mind you at this time there was no talk about better competition or subjective stuff like that. Laker fans were only interested in solid numbers.(cause they had the advantage there)

By the end of the 97 season, most Laker fans would admit (although begrudgingly) that Jordan> Magic. But the Lakers were better than the Bulls cause 5 titles in the 80's>>> 5 titles in the 90's.

It wasn't till 98 when the Bulls won their 6th title and pulled off a second 3 peat that this subjective notion came about that the 80's were the "greatest, most stupendous, brilliant, competitive, most magical era ever". And you know why this came about? Cause in 98 math wasn't on the Lakers fan side anymore. They loved math when 5>1. But in 98 when 6>5 and 72-10>69-13, well thats when everything went from concrete to subjective.

Lakers fans have hated the Bulls ever since. And even though they hated and therefore disrespected the Bulls, they were happy when most of the Bulls coaching staff and 2 of their championship starters came to their team. They [B]wanted[/B] so desperately for Kobe to be better than Jordan. Kobe represented their revenge of Jordan passing their hero Magic. Thats why to this day even when it's clear to everyone on the planet that Jordan>Kobe, Laker fans still can't say that. They have to add something stupid at the end like Jordan>Kobe but Kobe is better at clipping his toenails.[/QUOTE]



:applause:

[QUOTE=Soundwave]Oh for sure, there definitely is that breed of Laker fan out there.
[/QUOTE]

It seems to me that about 90% of Laker fans are of that breed.

Yep, well the 95-96 Bulls were clearly a once in a lifetime experience, not just a team. Greatest team to take the hardwood.

[QUOTE=puppychili]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]

Yeah... he does that. With everything. You should try to ignore his posts.

[B]1986 Celtics are to good of a Team and not to Mention Depper Team than a Weak Frontlined 1996 Bulls...:hammerhead:

These kids don`t know **** about basketball they are all brainwashed by the 1990s weaker expansioned era with pathetic "Offensive" Frontline Contenders.

The 1986 Celtics don`t need to double Jordan at all :confusedshrug:. They would just let him get his high 30s and 40s and simply by using their superior fundamentals, superior ball movement, great teamwork passing, good outside shooting by a Good Backcourt, superior FG% in the Whole Frontline, Superior Offensive and Defensive Frontline (C-PF-SF) by far than the Bulls andu sing their Key Player *Bird getting everyone involved (which he was better than Jordan at doing :)) its quite very simple:

Celtics in 6 :)

No Triangle Offense will Ever Beat a GREAT OFFENSIVE and GREAT DEFENSIVE FRONTLINE:confusedshrug:.

Especially the Greatest Frontline Ever in its PRIME in 1986. One that had GREAT BALL MOVEMENT, PASSING, FUNDAMENTALS, BASKETBALL IQ, DEFENSE and a Team that has a Good Enough Backcourt to Shoot, Score and Make Great Passes. Not to mention they could play any style of game :confusedshrug:

1986 Celtics might have been boring and ugly to watch because nobody likes a Slow Paced Frontline Oriented Team. They like to watch Laker Showtime Fast Paced, Flashy Fast Break Passes and Dunks. Exciting Triangle Exterior Offense (agains obviously weak teams of the 90s) etc but when reality arrives like it did in 2008 with the Celtics beating the Lakers with Ease just by having a WAY SUPERIOR FRONTLINE OFFENSIVELY AND DEFENSIVLY (not to mention Rebounding Capacities)...you will see many grins start to appear.

People Get Real...:hammerhead:

1986 Celtics = Greatest Team Ever.[/B]

[QUOTE]The 1986 Celtics don`t need to double Jordan at all [/QUOTE]

Thats why they were triple teaming him in 86'.

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Zu6JZXwBt8"]Shreds the great front line in Game 1[/URL]

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69vkEcc-zfc&feature=related"]Utterly dominates it here in Game 2 with each Celtic taking a turn guarding him[/URL]

What an idiot this guy is!!:banghead:

By the way what great front lines did the Celtics play that year?