1. 2000-09
2. 1980-89
3. 1990-99
4. 1960-69
5. 1970-79
...
9001. 2010-present
9002. 1940-49
9003. 1950-59
Printable View
1. 2000-09
2. 1980-89
3. 1990-99
4. 1960-69
5. 1970-79
...
9001. 2010-present
9002. 1940-49
9003. 1950-59
[QUOTE=Money 23]1) '89 - '95
2) 2008 - Current
3) '84 - '88
4) '96 - '98
5) 2004 - 2007
6) '99 - 2003[/quote]
This.
If we go by rings (in usual ISH fashion) I'd say the 90s had the coolest though.
[URL="http://i.imgur.com/MCLC4.jpg"][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/MCLC4l.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
I mean look at that '93 Bulls ring. Pure sex.
[IMG]http://thumbs4.ebaystatic.com/d/l225/m/m-7agEJawfk1SP6pinvTo7Q.jpg[/IMG]
1. 1984-1990
2. 1991-1998
3. 2008-present
4. 1999-2007
5. 1960-'69
[QUOTE=Money 23]LOL ... then what is domination? Do explain.[/QUOTE]
Simply winning in a dominating fashion.
[QUOTE=RaininTwos]So many agendas[/QUOTE]
lol...seriously :lol
I find it interesting that people who didn't exist during certain eras can rank them. Only on the internet can someone be an expert with zero experience to back it up.
[QUOTE=Freedom Kid7]1. 80s
2. 90s
3. 60s
4. 00s
GAP
5. 70s (especially from 75 to 80)
6. pre-Bill Russell[/QUOTE]
:bowdown:
I do have to say that there has been a very clear development in team basketball that has developed very evenly over the decades. As in, team defense and offense pretty much plays out like 00s>90s>80s> etc, but the actual ability of individual players on average for each decade is pretty even, though a little bit different. Mostly because of the growth of the number of teams as the leagues talent level grows.
[QUOTE=RaininTwos]So many agendas[/QUOTE]
True, but there's always consensus in these things, eventually.
Whether someone wants to follow the norm is completely up to them. It's pretty much subjective.
1 - 80's
2 - 90's
3 - 70's
4 - 00's
5 - 50's/60's
The worst era: 1996-2003. Just look at the teams making it to the finals (outside of Bulls and Lakers).
[QUOTE=Magic 32]The worst era: 1996-2003. Just look at the teams making it to the finals (outside of Bulls and Lakers).[/QUOTE]
96 Sonics
95 / 96 Magic
97 Heat
96 / 97 / 98 / 99 Knicks
97 / 98 / 99 Jazz
98 / 99 / 2000 Pacers
97 / 98 / 99 Lakers
99 / 2000 Suns
99 / 2000 / 2001 / 2002 / 2003 Spurs
2002 Kings
Were all some really good teams, but yea I'd be inclined to agree. I think play got worse during and after the lockout season.
[QUOTE=Money 23]96 Sonics
95 / 96 Magic
97 Heat
96 / 97 / 98 / 99 Knicks
97 / 98 / 99 Jazz
98 / 99 / 2000 Pacers
97 / 98 / 99 Lakers
99 / 2000 Suns
99 / 2000 / 2001 / 2002 / 2003 Spurs
2002 Kings
Were all some really good teams, but yea I'd be inclined to agree. I think play got worse during and after the lockout season.[/QUOTE]
Yea. I mean in a vacuum I'd agree that the late 80's-early 90's were the pinnacle of basketball..followed by present day bball and then the early 80's and late 90's.
The problem with these rankings, though, is every generation produces an elite (legendary) team or two. Moreso players. Guys like Russell, Wilt, Bird, Magic, Kareem, West, Erving, Moses, Stockton, etc. would dominate in any ERA.
1.Jordan Dynasty
2.Shaq-fu Dynasty
3.James Dynasty
4.Russel Dynasty
5.pre-Russel Dynasty
Ive only watched the latter 80s, whole 90s and 00s and current. I dont understand how anyone can judge or compare an era if they never watched it.
the 80s and 90s completely shit on the 00s and current era but current era has a lot of potential. maybe if we get handchecking back and more dominant center players again, it will certainly become a throwback era.