Printable View
[QUOTE=puppychili]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:
[B]By the way what great front lines did the Celtics play that year?[/B][/QUOTE]
Ralph Sampson and Hakeem Olajuwon
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]Ralph Sampson and Hakeem Olajuwon[/QUOTE]
its funny how you talk about ralph sampson like he was an all-time great and then treat guys like hardaway and webber like they were scrubs. when the truth is that both of those players had much better careers.
Hey dude Sampson played in the 80's which means he must of been killer.:D
Seriously though Sampson was good. But if all you got is one great front line, according to the logic of alot of people around here, doesn't that bring down the Celtics front line since they didn't have a ton of competition.
I mean look at the 3 centers they played before Hakeem.
Hardly stellar, even though they played in the 80's.:D
[QUOTE=97 bulls]its funny how you talk about ralph sampson like he was an all-time great and then treat guys like hardaway and webber like they were scrubs. when the truth is that both of those players had much better careers.[/QUOTE]
Ralph Sampson was a BEAST before his injury. No one can argue this. He was an All Star Player. And I never said Hardaway and Webber were scrubs. All I said was they were not in the same class as Magic and Barkley. Stop putting words into my mouth.
He's right. It's sir charles that calls everyone who didn't play in the 80's scrubs.
[B]By the way the person who said Pippen and Bird went head to head "offensively"...geat fu-ckin real :banghead:.
Scottie is not even close to Larry Bird Offensively. :banghead:
Larry Bird is one of the Best Offensive Players Ever (and Schooled Pippen and Grant Offensively at ages 31 to 35 with hardly a Back left; Remember Bird was not the same after his back injury of 1989?).
Larry Bird was a player that Could Take Whole Games Over On His On, The Best Passing Forward Ever! (Better than Scottie as Passer and Scottie was A Great One) and One of the Top Rebounding SFs of All Time (Better Rebounder than Scottie). Bird was also a Great Team Defender, Anticipator for Steals and Witty Defender. No to mention Clutch as Hell.
Even comparing Scottie to Bird is an insult. Don`t get me wrong..:Scottie is a Great a Top 6-10 SF but Not In the Level of The Bird`s..:confusedshrug:
And Yes Ralph Sampson was a Beast Before his Injury. A SF/PF that could dribble and was as fast as a Guard trapped in a 7`4 ft frame[/B]
[QUOTE=puppychili]He's right. It's sir charles that calls everyone who didn't play in the 80's scrubs.[/QUOTE]
[B]That`s not true:no: . I like many players that where drafted in the 90s like Webber, Kidd, Payton, Coleman (would have been the Best PF of the Late 90s with Malone), Garnett and even puss***** Duncan but its not my fault 95% If Not A 100% THAT ALL OF THESE are NOT in the Level of the:
HAKEEM`S
JORDAN`S
BARKLEY`S
MALONE`S
STOCKTON`S
DREXLERS
EWING`S
ROBINSON`S
etc...
Thats not my fault :confusedshrug: [/B]
[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]By the way the person who said Pippen and Bird went head to head "offensively"...geat fu-ckin real :banghead:.
Scottie is not even close to Larry Bird Offensively. :banghead:
Larry Bird is one of the Best Offensive Players Ever (and Schooled Pippen and Grant Offensively at ages 31 to 35 with hardly a Back left; Remember Bird was not the same after his back injury of 1989?).
Larry Bird was a player that Could Take Whole Games Over On His On, The Best Passing Forward Ever! (Better than Scottie as Passer and Scottie was A Great One) and One of the Top Rebounding SFs of All Time (Better Rebounder than Scottie). Bird was also a Great Team Defender, Anticipator for Steals and Witty Defender. No to mention Clutch as Hell.
Even comparing Scottie to Bird is an insult. Don`t get me wrong..:Scottie is a Great a Top 6-10 SF but Not In the Level of The Bird`s..:confusedshrug:
And Yes Ralph Sampson was a Beast Before his Injury. A SF/PF that could dribble and was as fast as a Guard trapped in a 7`4 ft frame[/B][/QUOTE]
hey i was going by the years 87 lakers used, and the fact is that head to head it was just about a wash. with an edge to bird. but factor in the defense (about 5-6 TOs a game by bird) and i could make argument for pip.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]Ralph Sampson was a BEAST before his injury. No one can argue this. He was an All Star Player. And I never said Hardaway and Webber were scrubs. All I said was they were not in the same class as Magic and Barkley. Stop putting words into my mouth.[/QUOTE]
i agree sampson was very good for about 2-3 seasons. but when we were talking about the 90s players and i included players like penny, hill, and webber. you made it seem like they were insignificant
[QUOTE=97 bulls]i agree sampson was very good for about 2-3 seasons. but when we were talking about the 90s players and i included players like penny, hill, and webber. you made it seem like they were insignificant[/QUOTE]
You were comparing those players to Magic and Barkley thats why I made it look like they were insignificant.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers]You were comparing those players to Magic and Barkley thats why I made it look like they were insignificant.[/QUOTE]
i think theres a misunderstanding. those guys arent better than magic or charles but they were very good.
[QUOTE=72-10]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]
The 1996 Bulls are more athletic, better defensively on the perimeter with Jordan, Harper, Pippen . Rodman could provide more than capable interior defense. The willowy Kukoc and Kerr both can knock down open Js. The 1986 Celtics with Bird at his peak then are the epitome of toughness. McHale, Parish with a healthy Bill Walton who won Sixth Man of The Year that season as a triumvirate is an overwhelming front line. Dennis Johnson was still an elite defender with the streaky Ainge as his running mate. Sichting and Wedman are as reliable as the Bulls' trio of ivory snipers though Wedman IMO is much better than Buechler any day. The series would probably be the classic OK Corral shootout between Jordan and Bird. Jordan could score on DJ though he will have to work for them to some degree. Same goes with Bird with Pippen covering him though Larry Legend's deep reserves of will and heart are well chronicled. I'd give Bird the edge in that matchup even though Pip was a stellar defender. Would Rodman and company have slowed down McHale and Parish in the post? No unless the Worm could get into McHale's head. Parish would outplay Longley and Wennington... Heck, the then resurrected Big Redhead would outplay Longley and Wennington if he was a starter. If the 1996 Bulls get out in transition, the slower Celtics would be at a disadvantage. Half court? The mighty Celtic frontcourt would feast where they will pound it inside. Bird can score on the post too along with ruggedly hitting the glass for rebounds. It is THE factor that would decide the series. Offensive and defensive rebounding edge to the Celtics EVEN with the electric Rodman on the floor. You can't run when you constantly have to pull the ball from the basket then have to inbound it. Home floor factor? Not even close. I'd go with Boston Garden with its cramped visitor locker rooms, rats in the showers, the inside heat on the floor, the rabid fans that could make Attila's Huns look like a Sunday church group are intimidating. Not too mention the false fire alarms, crank phone calls during off days between games in that lovely city. Winner of this fantasy series? [B]I call the Celtics in six.[/B]
I disagree with your outcome but I respect how you came to it.
Personally I think you're underrating Jordan in your analysis. I think he would go crazy when presented with such a challenge especially with so many people saying he couldn't win. I definitely think that Rodman could get in McHales head. Rambis got him to swing so you know Rodman would with his antics. Bulls would have home court too based on the better record. But theres no way that Bird would go quietly though. Most of your analysis I agree with. The series would go the distance for sure, but I see Chicago coming out on top in Game 7 at home.:cheers:
LMAO, who says Bulls get homecourt. They only got 5 more wins in a MUCH weaker league.
I was wondering when you'd show up here elite. Why don't you go back a few pages and read my posts on the "great 80's" along with the one on Laker fans.
Besides 5 more wins is 5 more wins. The 2008 Celtics played in the east which everybody sees as weaker than the west but they still got home court in the Finals cause they had the better record.
You know now that I think about it the whole east/west argument correlates very well with the 80's/90's argument. For at least the past 6 years the east has been called the JV, leastern conference, etc. But while the east may have been weaker overall that doesn't mean that they didn't have great teams.
In fact over the past 6 years the east and west have 3 titles apiece. But on paper people like you and sir charles would say the east would have no chance simply cause the west was the stronger conference.
In fact many people did make that argument. They pointed out how the Celtics went 7 games with the hawks so somehow that meant that they couldn't beat the Lakers who played in the West and took out the defending champion Spurs in the playoffs rather easily.
So going by those strength of competition comparisons along with breaking down the individual match ups on paper, the Lakers were supposed to beat Boston handily.
But Boston crushed the Lakers in 6 in historical fashion. Funny huh?