Are the 1986 Celtics the most overrated team

[highwhey]

Yes, yes they are. 1986 Celtics>>>NBA, that's how good they are(according to the majority in ISH)

[1987_Lakers]

Looking at the series spread doesn't quite show the whole picture tbh. LA basicall blew out the Celtics in the first two games (game 2 would have been worse if not for the Celts scoring like 38 in the third Q). In game 3, LA was kicking the Celtics ass after the first Q but DJ and Birk went ape sh!t in the second and scored like 12 baskets. DJ continued to torch the Lakers and hit like 10 straight baskets. Greg Kite also had a valiant effort and had like 9 boards off the bench (his super-scrub moment). One thing to note is James Worthy was like 6-16 in this game after torching them in the first two games. They needed to limit James to win the game. In game 4, Celtics choked the game and blew like a 8 point lead late in the 4th before Magic's famous hook. LA was toying with Boston in game 6 and led by like 19 at one point in the 4th. Three of their wins were basically blow outs.

I know all of this. I have all 6 games on DVD. the First 2 games were blowouts. Celtics won a close game 3. Lakers won a close game 4. Celtics blew out the Lakers in game 5. And in Game 6 the Celtics led the Lakers at halftime, but the Lakers totally outplayed them in the second half.

Also, the 86 Celtics were taken to 6 games by the 86 Rockets despite Ralph Ssmpson having a weak series. Why can't that be used against that team?

Both the '86 Celtics & '87 Lakers took their opponent to 6 games, but I think the Celtics had a more dominant performance in the Finals against a healthy team compared to the Lakers who had a less dominant performance against an injured team. Both teams were great though, I have the '86 Celtics & '87 Lakers in my top 3 team all-time list.

[Niquesports]

Looking at the series spread doesn't quite show the whole picture tbh. LA basicall blew out the Celtics in the first two games (game 2 would have been worse if not for the Celts scoring like 38 in the third Q). In game 3, LA was kicking the Celtics ass after the first Q but DJ and Birk went ape sh!t in the second and scored like 12 baskets. DJ continued to torch the Lakers and hit like 10 straight baskets. Greg Kite also had a valiant effort and had like 9 boards off the bench (his super-scrub moment). One thing to note is James Worthy was like 6-16 in this game after torching them in the first two games. They needed to limit James to win the game. In game 4, Celtics choked the game and blew like a 8 point lead late in the 4th before Magic's famous hook. LA was toying with Boston in game 6 and led by like 19 at one point in the 4th. Three of their wins were basically blow outs.

Also, the 86 Celtics were taken to 6 games by the 86 Rockets despite Ralph Ssmpson having a weak series. Why can't that be used against that team?

Great post its funny when talking about the 86 Celtics people are always talking about injuries the next years but never give the Lakers any credit for the years there players were injured. IF the guy suited up and played I dont want to hear about he was hurt Isiah played on one foot and killed the lakers it was injuries that hurt the Celtics The lakers were just a better team

[chitownsfinest]

Both the '86 Celtics & '87 Lakers took their opponent to 6 games, but I think the Celtics had a more dominant performance in the Finals against a healthy team compared to the Lakers who had a less dominant performance against an injured team. Both teams were great though, I have the '86 Celtics & '87 Lakers in my top 3 team all-time list.

I still think the 87 Celtics were a nice team despite the injuries. Bird came off one of his finest series ever against the Piston, DJ played great that series and was hitting his J, Parrish's main problem were foul trouble, and Ainge was still efficient in the series despite having to guard a peaked Magic for most of the series and helped put game 5 away with 4 threes. McHale was banged up that series but his game was based on skill and not athleticism, meaning injuries would not affect his game as much. He still put up 20/9 on 59% shooting in that series and played like a warrior throughout. The bench was useless and Walton was finished at that point but I feel KC did not use Sam Vincent and Darren Daye enough in that series. Also, that same 87 Celts team beat the stacked Bucks and Pistons, not an easy feat by any means.

The 87 Lakers won their finals games by an average margin of 11.5 points. The 86 Celts won by an average margin of 13.5 points against a weaker opponent. I'd say their domination was relatively equal. Ralph Sampson underachieved that series and shot 44% and the Rockets were missing John Lucas (an important player who was the facilitator of the Rockets) in the 86 series but the Celts were still pushed to 6 games. That is just as worse as the 87 Lakers being pushed to 6 by a banged up Celtics team.

I have the 87 Lakers as my GOAT team. The 83 Sixers, 92 Bulls, 86 Celts, and 67 Sixers (no order) as the rest of my top 5.

[Niquesports]

I know all of this. I have all 6 games on DVD. the First 2 games were blowouts. Celtics won a close game 3. Lakers won a close game 4. Celtics blew out the Lakers in game 5. And in Game 6 the Celtics led the Lakers at halftime, but the Lakers totally outplayed them in the second half.



Both the '86 Celtics & '87 Lakers took their opponent to 6 games, but I think the Celtics had a more dominant performance in the Finals against a healthy team compared to the Lakers who had a less dominant performance against an injured team. Both teams were great though, I have the '86 Celtics & '87 Lakers in my top 3 team all-time list.

THe Cletics beat a Houston team that no one can name 5 players not named Hakeem or Sampson how is that dominant. And why wasnt the lakers in that finals could it be injuries? No question the 86 Celtics were a great team but how anyone rates them above the Showtime Lakers I just dont see it.

[1987_Lakers]

THe Cletics beat a Houston team that no one can name 5 players not named Hakeem or Sampson how is that dominant. And why wasnt the lakers in that finals could it be injuries? No question the 86 Celtics were a great team but how anyone rates them above the Showtime Lakers I just dont see it.

The Rockets in '86 had a great team, they beat a healthy Lakers team in the WCF in 5 games (no key laker was injured). Rockets had 2 dominant big men in the frontline in Hakeem and Ralph, the team also featured Lewis Lloyd, All NBA Defender Rodney McCray etc. After the '86 season, many were saying how the Rockets were the future of the NBA, of course it never happened because of injuries to Ralph Sampson and drug abuse on that team.

If we are talking about who was the better team throughout the 80's...It would be the Lakers. If we are talking about a single season team....give me the '86 Celtics. Just my opinion.

[Big#50]

oops. I ment 72 lakers... I was thinking 69 because they won 69 games. Anyway, there is a reason why there is only 1 team to ever win 70 games, because they were the greatest team ever and had the greatest guy to close out a game with ever.

2000 Lakers, 2004 Pistons and 2005 Spurs all beat the 96 Bulls.

[Niquesports]

The Rockets in '86 had a great team, they beat a healthy Lakers team in the WCF in 5 games (no key laker was injured). Rockets had 2 dominant big men in the frontline in Hakeem and Ralph, the team also featured Lewis Lloyd, All NBA Defender Rodney McCray etc. After the '86 season, many were saying how the Rockets were the future of the NBA, of course it never happened because of injuries to Ralph Sampson and drug abuse on that team.

If we are talking about who was the better team throughout the 80's...It would be the Lakers. If we are talking about a single season team....give me the '86 Celtics. Just my opinion.

I can respect your opinion and I dont think it a crazy one. IMO THe 87 Lakers were the greatest single season team The difference maker to me is that THe Celtics lack of speed and athletism is what makes the difference They had no answer for Worthy and couldnt stop the lakers fastbreak. On the other hand the lakers had Cooper and AC Green as well as Thompson to match up with Bostons front court as well as a still efective Jabbar and Magic and Scott >>> DJ and Anige. TO me its like Ali vs Frazier the fight goes down to the end but Ali wins and the 87 Lakers are Ali.

[OldSchoolBBall]

lol @ bitter ass Laker fans who can't handle the fact that the '86 Celts were the best single season team of the 80's (followed by the '87 Lakers, '83 Sixers, and '85 Lakers in a virtual tie).

[Niquesports]

lol @ bitter ass Laker fans who can't handle the fact that the '86 Celts were the best single season team of the 80's (followed by the '87 Lakers and '83 Sixers in a virtual tie).

Whats funny is the fact people want to think someones bitter talking about an opinion but fact is the lakers repeated something the Celtics couldnt do thats the sign of a Great team backing up what you did the year before. SUre any team can have a good year but the sign of a true Champ is coming back the next year and doing it again. lol To even think the 86 Celtics were better than any Russell team. You silly point is like saying the Hakeem Rocktes were a better single season team than the Bulls

[OldSchoolBBall]

I said that they were the best single season team of the 80's, not all time, so I'm not sure why you're talking about Russell.

[Niquesports]

I said that they were the best single season team of the 80's, not all time, so I'm not sure why you're talking about Russell.

That wasnt really meant for you its for people that say the 86 team is the Greatest team ever. By the way 87 Lakers 83 Sixers and 82 Lakers all better than 86 Celtics

[OldSchoolBBall]

That wasnt really meant for you its for people that say the 86 team is the Greatest team ever. By the way 87 Lakers 83 Sixers and 82 Lakers all better than 86 Celtics

[ElBronco]

I don't think repeating should have any relevance when judging the merits of a Team in any given year. Every year should essentially be judged on it's own legs irrespective of what happened the year before or after.

[OldSchoolBBall]

2000 Lakers, 2004 Pistons and 2005 Spurs all beat the 96 Bulls.

The only team from this decade that has a chance to beat the '96 Bulls are the 2001 (not 2000) Lakers. LMAO @ your post.