Originally Posted by 97 bulls
No. You brought it up. Ghengis stated that Jordan was a better leader because he led his team to a better finals record than Magic. You then replied with that same drivel about how Jordan's Bulls in the 80s couldn't beat the Celtics (cuz thats what youre getting at). As if that was a fair assesment. Logical people know the Bulls in the mid 80s werent any good. Which again shows your agenda. How can you on one hand knock the Bulls for not beating the Celtics in 86 and 87 when he didnt have sufficient help because Pippen, Grant, Cartwright, Jackson etc werent there, But then knock their beating the Lakers because Kareem and Coop werent there? You dont see how hypocritical that is? You cant even go a sentence without contradicting yourself.
OK. Since you are fairly intelligent poster on this website (although dreadful as far as agenda) I'll try and get you to have SOME kind of understanding about a different point of view. Although as daRegul8er often comments, it seems that trying to do this is truly a broken reed.
It has nothing to do with the fact that Jordan got beat over and over in the 80s. His teams were poor.
I don't think that Jordan's 1991 (or 98 either) Bulls team could have beaten the Showtime Lakers of the early 80s.
Nor could they have beaten the 1983 Sixers.
Nor could they have beaten the 89 Pistons.
Nor could they have beaten the Celtics of at least a couple years in through there, '86 being only the most obvious.
In my opinion, Mike was 6-0 because he didn't play ANY TEAM OF THAT QUALITY IN THE FINALS. Is that plain enough?