Did Jordan ever face a team in the Finals as good as the '06-07 Spurs?

[MaxFly]

Haha, I knew you'd come back saying something like this. It depends on the personnel and the team's commitment to defense. A team like Chicago, which had 3 long perimeter defenders with tremendous instincts (particularly Jordan and Pippen, but also Harper) and a great defender in Rodman, but no shotblocking presence whatsoever, would only be helped by being able to play an "area," since their one defensive weakness (post/interior defense) would be mitigated. This includes post and interior (paint) defense in general. Their only real shotblockers -- Jordan and Pippen -- would be able to be much closer to the action inside.

That's interesting... Following that logic, teams like the Spurs and Pistons would also benefit greatly from the new rules, considering both teams have good perimeter defenders in addition to good players defending the post. The new defensive rules give players the ability to roam much more and double team a player earlier, and given both teams commitment to defense, this would be a great advantage over the previous rules.

It's funny, because the last time this discussion was had, many posters, including you, stressed that the rules affected all teams negatively. Now you've changed your stance slightly, saying that the personnel and the team's commitment are very important to defense and that some teams actually benefit from the new rules, playing better defense now than they would have without these rules. These are things that I've been saying every since the rules were ammended.

It took a discussion about Jordan and the 90s Bulls for you to see the light. Go figure.

[Rasheed1]

Haha, I knew you'd come back saying something like this. It depends on the personnel and the team's commitment to defense. A team like Chicago, which had 3 long perimeter defenders with tremendous instincts (particularly Jordan and Pippen, but also Harper) and a great defender in Rodman, but no shotblocking presence whatsoever, would only be helped by being able to play an "area," since their one defensive weakness (post/interior defense) would be mitigated. This includes post and interior (paint) defense in general. Their only real shotblockers -- Jordan and Pippen -- would be able to be much closer to the action inside.

exactly, the bulls were great defenders partially because they were long in the arms and could move their feet.... they reminded me of a group of dopermans when they get out running....Ginobilli and Parker would have trouble getting beyond their reach....and no touch fouls would make things really hard on ginobilli if he has Pippen or Jordan on him..

people forget than while Rodman was shorter than Duncan, he was a beast and he was powerful enough to keep guys like SHaq and malone off the block, so he could definitely keep TD out of the low post area and disrupt his game...

Bowen wouldnt stop Mj, they'd need to double and trap and Mj would split that and penetrate the middle..

I dont see how the Spurs could stand

[EricForman]

yo dizzle i still want you to explain your "tony parker is more unstoppable than jordan" comment.

[MaxFly]

yo dizzle i still want you to explain your "tony parker is more unstoppable than jordan" comment.

Lol, I'd like and explanation for that as well.

[Admiral]

1998 West:

Jazz 62 wins
Lakers 61 wins
Sonics 61 wins
Spurs 56 wins
Suns 56 wins
Blazers 46 wins
Wolves 45 wins
Rockets 41 wins

Average: 53.5 wins


2007 West:

Mavericks 67 wins
Suns 61 wins
Spurs 58 wins
Rockets 52 wins
Jazz 51 wins
Nuggets 45 wins
Warriors 42 wins
Lakers 42 wins

Average: 52.3 wins

owned.

[Soundwave]

The '96 Sonics and '98 Jazz would beat the Spurs in a 7-game series.

The '92 Blazers (more depth), '93 Suns could probably also do it. I wouldn't neccessarily count the '91 Lakers out either.

Parker and Manu are borderline All-Stars ... they would be exposed for what they are if they tried to do that to a prime Pippen or Payton or even Stockton.

Those players are too smart to get worked by borderline All-Stars like that. Not happening. Bruce Bowen is also a p-ssy compared to some of the defenses Jordan had to face (Knicks, Pistons, etc.), that wouldn't phase him at all.

[beau_boy04]

yo dizzle i still want you to explain your "tony parker is more unstoppable than jordan" comment.

[poeticism707]

I just want to thank everyone for posting on this particular thread on ISH. I'm going to save it and keep it as personal record to trot out when necessary. All of you that have argued so long, laboriously, with well documented arguments about how the Bulls and just about every other team in the 90s (and other eras no doubt) would destory the Spurs in their 3 (4?) title years making it abundantly clear that:

Tim Duncan is inarguably top-5 ALL TIME, and maybe even the GOAT. Why? Because you Tim Duncan and Spurs bashers cannot have it both ways. When you are comparing whatever other flavor of the month big man or player (ie KG, Malone, Barkley, Hakeem, Shaq; or guards like Kobe, Nash, etc) you always talk about how great the spurs organization is, and how great Parker and Ginobli are. But in the historical sense this thread overwhelmingly proves that The Spurs are the worst of the worst, could not beat any great dynasties. So how did they do it then? How did the Spurs win 2 titles from the Shaq-Kobe Lakers, 1 from the New Bad boy Pistons, and maybe even a 4th from every else? Since the role players are as bad as you think, not being able to hold a candle to other great players, role players and otherwise, then what is the reason this sorry bunch of bums has won 3 (maybe 4 up 2-0 in the Finals) titles? There is only won reason left: Tim Duncan. Since his teammates are so horrid, he has won more titles and finals MVPs than everyone but the very elite (Russel 11-13, Jordan 6, Magic 5, Bird 3). HOWEVER he has won with so much less. They were great dynasties the likes of which his Spur teammates couldn't be their teams' ball boy. That means (and this is nifty KG-would-win-just-as-much-or-more-with-Spurs-instead-of-Duncan argument) that if Russel won 11 (or 13) with the Celtics, Duncan would have won 15 in his place. Put Duncan on the Bulls instead of Jordan, he'd win 8-9! Duncan with the Showtime Lakers? 7-8? Duncan with the 80s Celtics 5-6! Duncan instead of Shaq, making it the Duncan and Kobe (lol) Lakers? 10 titles (I'm not kidding)? Again, for the slow witted, how is this possible? Well, if Duncan can win 3 (maybe 4) titles with talentless nobodies, just average NBA joes historically, then TD is is the GOAT, of every position, of all time.
Just to repeat our lesson in logic ISH, you cannot have it both ways: Either the Spurs suck (like this thread attests) and Duncan is is the GOAT or at least top-3/4 all time, or TD sucks, and the Ginobli and Parker are HOFs, and should win a 2-3 MVPs. According to this thread, you've already made your decision. TD is the GOAT!

[SCdac]

There is only won reason left: Tim Duncan.

I disagree. Duncan IS the Spurs, don't get me wrong. But he's not the "won" (or sole) reason the Spurs are consistently contenders/champions.

I said back in page whatever of this thread, Gregg Popovich is being severely underrated. He is a HOF coach and isn't even being factored into people's arguments.

When you talk about great teams, you have to mention their coaches.

As is, Popovich is standing with 576 wins and 276 losses with the Spurs (.676). And he's not one to avoid implementing defensive schemes, which is huge in all of his 3 titles with the Spurs.

[poeticism707]

I disagree. Duncan IS the Spurs, don't get me wrong. But he's not the "won" (or sole) reason the Spurs are consistently contenders/champions.

I said back in page whatever of this thread, Gregg Popovich is being severely underrated. He is a HOF coach and isn't even being factored into people's arguments.

When you talk about great teams, you have to mention their coaches.

As is, Popovich is standing with 576 wins and 276 losses with the Spurs (.676). And he's not one to avoid implementing defensive schemes, which is huge in all of his 3 titles with the Spurs.

This is an excellent point, and Pop deseves his share of credit. HOWEVER, who did Shaq and Jordan have coaching them-Phil Jackson, tied for NBA record with 9 titles? Russel's coach was legendary Red Aurbach-also 9 titles. Showtime Lakers- Pat Riley, 6+ (not sure exactly how many) titles? You have presented an asterisk to the Spurs, in this case Tim Duncan (as this thread shows) that every great player gets, and this STILL proves my point further: those other coaches mentioned had more to work with. All the Pop had was Tim Duncan and some volunteers from the crowd. Thanks for proving that Duncan is the GOAT of all positions, of all time!

[beau_boy04]

People are saying the Spurs sucks is because they are being compared to the Bulls dynasty thats it. If they were being compared to another championship team, The Spurs would have a better chance. Dunca is not even a top 5 all-time, let alone the GOAT ;)

[Loki]

Tim Duncan is inarguably top-5 ALL TIME, and maybe even the GOAT.

No.

[poeticism707]

People are saying the Spurs sucks is because they are being compared to the Bulls dynasty thats it. If they were being compared to another championship team, The Spurs would have a better chance. Dunca is not even a top 5 all-time, let alone the GOAT ;)

Go back and read through the threads. Most people are saying rather strongly that the none of the Spurs teams could beat any dynasties (even though the topic is MJs Bulls), as well waa as not being championship contenders in other eras. In essence would never win a nerver win titlte in any other era.

[gengiskhan]

Hmm lets see.

1991 finalist Runner Up MVP : Magic
1992 finalist Runner Up MVP : Drexler
1993 finalist NBA MVP : Barkley
1996 finalists Runner Up MVP + NBA DPOY : Kemp & Payton
1997 finalist NBA MVP: Malone
1998 finalist Runner up MVP: Malone


so yes. Every time, MJ faced the very best team in the finals.

unlike today's garbage NBA era where NBA MVP & Runner Up MVP Rose & Howard are watching NBA finals in their living room.