PDA

View Full Version : Who would win the 96 Bulls or the 86 Celtics?



Lakersfan2483
07-22-2008, 05:37 AM
96 Bulls

Harper
MJ
Pippen
Rodman
Longley

86 Celtics

D. Johnson
Ainge
Bird
Mchale
Parrish

Bulls avg. ppg 105. 2ppg Def. ppg. 92.9

Celtics avg. ppg 114.1 ppg Def. ppg 104.7

Leading scorers: MJ, 30.4ppg, Bird 25.8ppg

goku
07-22-2008, 06:06 AM
bull's because of mj but it would be close

bleedCUBBIEblue
07-22-2008, 08:28 AM
how is that even a question?...

any team with jordan is better than any other team in history

JordansBulls
07-22-2008, 08:29 AM
Here was something done comparing all the greatest teams ever on ESPN a year ago.

This would be one hell of a series. I take the Bulls, but it would go 7 games.

Bulls would win based on the fact that MJ never lost a series with HC advantage. But the series would be close.

Source: ESPN (http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2007/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=Finalists1-10)

1. 1996 Chicago Bulls Score: 327.9
KEY FACTS
Regular-season record: 72-10
Postseason record: 15-3
Avg. scoring margin: +12.2
Avg. scoring margin, playoffs: +10.6
Finals result: Beat Seattle, 4-2 LEADERS (regular-season stats)
Scoring: Michael Jordan, 30.4 ppg
Rebounds: Dennis Rodman, 14.9 rpg
Assists: Scottie Pippen, 5.9 apg
Coach: Phil Jackson
Finals MVP: Michael Jordan

Hands down, the greatest team of all time. How can you choose another when these guys won 72 regular-season games and 14 of their first 15 in the postseason? The Bulls were so good they were first in both offensive and defensive efficiency, and outscored their opponents by 12.2 points per game.

With names like Jordan, Pippen, Rodman, and Toni Kukoc, not to mention a coach like Phil Jackson, this team was pretty much unbeatable -- in fact, seven of its playoff wins were by 17 points or more. The only nit to pick was the Bulls' consecutive losses to the Sonics in the Finals, but they were up 3-0 by then and seemingly bored with how good they were.


2. 1987 Los Angeles Lakers Score: 301.5
KEY FACTS
Regular-season record: 65-17
Postseason record: 15-3
Avg. scoring margin: +9.3
Avg. scoring margin, playoffs: +11.4
Finals result: Beat Boston, 4-2 LEADERS
Scoring: Magic Johnson, 23.9 ppg
Rebounds: A.C. Green, 7.9 rpg
Assists: Magic Johnson, 12.4 apg
Coach: Pat Riley
Finals MVP: Magic Johnson

Fittingly, the great Lakers and Celtics teams are in a virtual dead heat for second place. (You'll note that I just call the Lakers "Los Angeles" in this list -- no risk of confusing them with the Clippers here.) This L.A. team nudged ahead of Boston by virtue of winning 65 games in the regular season and then trashing the West -- 11 wins in 12 games -- to make the Finals. The Lakers beat the Celtics in six, and for the playoffs as a whole outscored their opponents by 205 points -- the best of any team on this list. Seven different players averaged double figures, led by Magic with 23.9 points per game.


3. 1986 Boston Celtics Score: 301.1
KEY FACTS
Regular-season record: 67-15
Postseason record: 15-3
Avg. scoring margin: +9.4
Avg. scoring margin, playoffs: +10.3
Finals result: Beat Houston, 4-2 LEADERS
Scoring: Larry Bird, 25.8 ppg
Rebounds: Larry Bird, 9.8 rpg
Assists: Larry Bird, 6.8 apg
Coach: K.C. Jones
Finals MVP: Larry Bird

The Celtics won 67 games in '86 behind the best frontcourt ever assembled -- Bird, Kevin McHale, Robert Parish and Bill Walton -- and followed it up by stampeding through the playoffs in 15 games. They rank behind L.A. mostly because their victory margin wasn't as strong in the playoffs. On the other hand, this isn't a bad list to be No. 3 on. And few teams will ever have five players averaging at least 15 a game in the playoffs, as Boston's legendary quintet did in this postseason.

BullySixChicago
07-22-2008, 09:49 AM
96 Bulls

Harper
MJ
Pippen
Rodman
Longley

86 Celtics

D. Johnson
Ainge
Bird
Mchale
Parrish

Bulls avg. ppg 105. 2ppg Def. ppg. 92.9

Celtics avg. ppg 114.1 ppg Def. ppg 104.7

Leading scorers: MJ, 30.4ppg, Bird 25.8ppg96 bulls in 6

sanfranfan1210
07-22-2008, 10:37 PM
Bulls

lakers4sho
07-22-2008, 11:14 PM
how is that even a question?...

any team with jordan is better than any other team in history

including that wizards team?? :D

KB24PG16
07-23-2008, 03:19 AM
i would pick any decent team with mj in his prime to win against any nba team present or past

Beno7500
07-23-2008, 03:23 AM
Bulls

Tom81
07-25-2008, 10:08 AM
96 Bulls

op12
08-06-2008, 02:21 PM
86 celts were too deep. mj would get his, but the big 3 would be too much. bird vs pippen would be good, but mchale, chief and walton would clean up inside.

bagwell368
08-06-2008, 06:50 PM
Oh come on! The Celts would crush them.

Win Shares all time rank:

Bulls:

#2 Jordan (maybe his 4th best year, but not far from #1 either)
#24 Pippen (enjoying maybe his best year)
#71 Rodman (already in his "I will not shoot" phase and at 35 on the decline
#128 Harper - well into his decline phase, not a major factor
#152 Kukoc - second best offensive year

Longley #560 HOF probable - 0% per basketball-reference

Celts:

#16 Parish - typical good season for him
#17 Bird his 3rd and last MVP, arguably his best year
#32 McHale probably his 2nd best year
#81 DJ best shooting year, and only 31 years old
#105 Ainge coming into his prime at age 26
#192 Wedman the gun off the bench towards the end of his career

Walton rated as 54th in HOF probability, the NBA sixth man of the year Award winner this year, and one of the great back-up center years ever (he ate Jabbar in every meeting I remember that year)

Sichting - solid reserve guard

OK, on paper, not looking good for Bulls. Now on to how it would be played:

McHale covered Pippen when they met, and gave him fits. Same thing now. Meanwhile the other way they would try Rodman on McHale and that wouldn't work because McHale was much longer and one of the 3-4 greatest low post players ever.

Parish would cover Rodman. Rodman might out fight Parish on the offensive glass, but Rodman could never harass Parish's rainbows. longly/kukoc would try Parish, and he would beat them on the break and on the blocks.

Bird would take Kukoc, and spend most of his time guarding the paint and passing lanes. Pippen would take Bird and have OK success. Pippen was good but he wasn't as good as Michael Cooper on Bird.

DJ would take MJ, and MJ would win most of the battles. Big plus for the Bulls, but DJ was enough of a player on D and O that he wouldn't fade to nothing, and would in fact put up two big games in MJ's face.

The other guards and bench guys more or less battle to a tie.

But with Walton uncoverable by anything the Bulls have in reserve, and the vastly superior front court and a much better passing team, how do the Celts not win in 5 or 6? It is the greatest team I have ever seen (going back to '67), and the '87 Lakers, '81 76'ers, and '89 Pistons would have all beaten any of the Bulls teams.

Why? Diffusion of talent due to expansion and the salary cap. Athletically there are really no advances in those 10 years that matter.

Sorry Bulls and MJ fans, they were not the best, and the best all around player (I'm a Celts fan) of all time IMO is Magic, not MJ.

Remember, Finals Game 6 Rookie season at age 20, Jabbar is out, Magic posted a 42/15/7/3 to win Series and MVP. First rookie to win Finals MVP. Jordan won nothing until Pippen and Jackson showed up.

MJ can't pass with Magic, can't rebound with him, can't run a team like him (a team of 5 MJ's would need 3 balls), and after Magic was around for 6-7 years his outside shot was as good as MJ's. And MJ can't play Center either.

MiamiHeat
08-06-2008, 07:37 PM
Bulls with MJ?
come on not even a question :D
Bulls win it

JordansBulls
08-06-2008, 07:57 PM
Oh come on! The Celts would crush them.

Win Shares all time rank:

Bulls:

#2 Jordan (maybe his 4th best year, but not far from #1 either)
#24 Pippen (enjoying maybe his best year)
#71 Rodman (already in his "I will not shoot" phase and at 35 on the decline
#128 Harper - well into his decline phase, not a major factor
#152 Kukoc - second best offensive year

Longley #560 HOF probable - 0% per basketball-reference

Celts:

#16 Parish - typical good season for him
#17 Bird his 3rd and last MVP, arguably his best year
#32 McHale probably his 2nd best year
#81 DJ best shooting year, and only 31 years old
#105 Ainge coming into his prime at age 26
#192 Wedman the gun off the bench towards the end of his career

Walton rated as 54th in HOF probability, the NBA sixth man of the year Award winner this year, and one of the great back-up center years ever (he ate Jabbar in every meeting I remember that year)

Sichting - solid reserve guard

OK, on paper, not looking good for Bulls. Now on to how it would be played:

McHale covered Pippen when they met, and gave him fits. Same thing now. Meanwhile the other way they would try Rodman on McHale and that wouldn't work because McHale was much longer and one of the 3-4 greatest low post players ever.

Parish would cover Rodman. Rodman might out fight Parish on the offensive glass, but Rodman could never harass Parish's rainbows. longly/kukoc would try Parish, and he would beat them on the break and on the blocks.

Bird would take Kukoc, and spend most of his time guarding the paint and passing lanes. Pippen would take Bird and have OK success. Pippen was good but he wasn't as good as Michael Cooper on Bird.

DJ would take MJ, and MJ would win most of the battles. Big plus for the Bulls, but DJ was enough of a player on D and O that he wouldn't fade to nothing, and would in fact put up two big games in MJ's face.

The other guards and bench guys more or less battle to a tie.

But with Walton uncoverable by anything the Bulls have in reserve, and the vastly superior front court and a much better passing team, how do the Celts not win in 5 or 6? It is the greatest team I have ever seen (going back to '67), and the '87 Lakers, '81 76'ers, and '89 Pistons would have all beaten any of the Bulls teams.

Why? Diffusion of talent due to expansion and the salary cap. Athletically there are really no advances in those 10 years that matter.

Sorry Bulls and MJ fans, they were not the best, and the best all around player (I'm a Celts fan) of all time IMO is Magic, not MJ.

Remember, Finals Game 6 Rookie season at age 20, Jabbar is out, Magic posted a 42/15/7/3 to win Series and MVP. First rookie to win Finals MVP. Jordan won nothing until Pippen and Jackson showed up.

MJ can't pass with Magic, can't rebound with him, can't run a team like him (a team of 5 MJ's would need 3 balls), and after Magic was around for 6-7 years his outside shot was as good as MJ's. And MJ can't play Center either.

You forgot the Bulls were the only team to ever lead the league in Offensive and Defensive Efficiency. I like how you insinuate that that DJ could hold MJ when MJ set the record for most points ever in a playoff game on the Celtics.

Also it is funny you mention that MJ never won anything without Pippen or Phil Jackson, but let me you ask, what did Magic win without a top 5 player all time or what did Bird win without Mchale and Parish.


It's annoying to read people say, "Well, _______ didn't do it alone. He had teammates." No duh. A guy doesn't play 1-on-5. However, it's also true that on any given championship team there's a guy who's the main reason they are where they are, and everyone else contributes in their own way. But everyone's contributions are not equal. Some players make more of a contribution to the team's success than others, and there's usually one guy without whom the whole thing wouldn't be possible (there have been a couple exceptions in NBA history). It's not devaluing the contribution of the rest of the team, but even the rest of the team themselves would tell you that ________ was the main reason. It ridiculous that it should even need explaining.

But on the subject of the Celtics and the Bulls this is how they ranked.

http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2007/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=Finalists1-10


1. 1996 Chicago Bulls Score: 327.9
KEY FACTS
Regular-season record: 72-10
Postseason record: 15-3
Avg. scoring margin: +12.2
Avg. scoring margin, playoffs: +10.6
Finals result: Beat Seattle, 4-2 LEADERS (regular-season stats)
Scoring: Michael Jordan, 30.4 ppg
Rebounds: Dennis Rodman, 14.9 rpg
Assists: Scottie Pippen, 5.9 apg
Coach: Phil Jackson
Finals MVP: Michael Jordan

Hands down, the greatest team of all time. How can you choose another when these guys won 72 regular-season games and 14 of their first 15 in the postseason? The Bulls were so good they were first in both offensive and defensive efficiency, and outscored their opponents by 12.2 points per game.

With names like Jordan, Pippen, Rodman, and Toni Kukoc, not to mention a coach like Phil Jackson, this team was pretty much unbeatable -- in fact, seven of its playoff wins were by 17 points or more. The only nit to pick was the Bulls' consecutive losses to the Sonics in the Finals, but they were up 3-0 by then and seemingly bored with how good they were.


2. 1987 Los Angeles Lakers Score: 301.5
KEY FACTS
Regular-season record: 65-17
Postseason record: 15-3
Avg. scoring margin: +9.3
Avg. scoring margin, playoffs: +11.4
Finals result: Beat Boston, 4-2 LEADERS
Scoring: Magic Johnson, 23.9 ppg
Rebounds: A.C. Green, 7.9 rpg
Assists: Magic Johnson, 12.4 apg
Coach: Pat Riley
Finals MVP: Magic Johnson


Fittingly, the great Lakers and Celtics teams are in a virtual dead heat for second place. (You'll note that I just call the Lakers "Los Angeles" in this list -- no risk of confusing them with the Clippers here.) This L.A. team nudged ahead of Boston by virtue of winning 65 games in the regular season and then trashing the West -- 11 wins in 12 games -- to make the Finals. The Lakers beat the Celtics in six, and for the playoffs as a whole outscored their opponents by 205 points -- the best of any team on this list. Seven different players averaged double figures, led by Magic with 23.9 points per game.

3. 1986 Boston Celtics Score: 301.1
KEY FACTS
Regular-season record: 67-15
Postseason record: 15-3
Avg. scoring margin: +9.4
Avg. scoring margin, playoffs: +10.3
Finals result: Beat Houston, 4-2 LEADERS
Scoring: Larry Bird, 25.8 ppg
Rebounds: Larry Bird, 9.8 rpg
Assists: Larry Bird, 6.8 apg
Coach: K.C. Jones
Finals MVP: Larry Bird

The Celtics won 67 games in '86 behind the best frontcourt ever assembled -- Bird, Kevin McHale, Robert Parish and Bill Walton -- and followed it up by stampeding through the playoffs in 15 games. They rank behind L.A. mostly because their victory margin wasn't as strong in the playoffs. On the other hand, this isn't a bad list to be No. 3 on. And few teams will ever have five players averaging at least 15 a game in the playoffs, as Boston's legendary quintet did in this postseason.




I like how you pointed out Magic's game in 1980 of 42/15/7, but how come no one ever mentions that Jamal Wilkes put up 37 and 10 that game as well?

Also the next year Magic and Kareem lost in the 1st round to a team under .500

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1122425/index.htm



A more telling test: the final game in the 1981 L.A.-Houston best-of-three miniseries, when the Rockets threatened to oust the defending champion Lakers in L.A. First, with the score tied at 85, :30 left. Magic blew two of three free throws. After the Rockets scored to go up 87-86, the Lakers looked to Magic once more. With :03 left, he didn't just miss; his driving jumper in the lane didn't even draw iron. Exit L.

Now that happened with Magic's team having the homecourt being the favorite and losing in round 1 to a team below .500.

If you are going to base how great someone is on one game then couldn't you mention how bad a player was in a pivotal game in the finals or a playoff series with the HC Advantage as well?

bagwell368
08-06-2008, 10:51 PM
You forgot the Bulls were the only team to ever lead the league in Offensive and Defensive Efficiency. I like how you insinuate that that DJ could hold MJ when MJ set the record for most points ever in a playoff game on the Celtics.

Number one, I said MJ would win the battle, but that DJ was good enough to fire back a few times. Who won that series BTW? You're telling me that Bulls team had an offense superior the Celts of 86?

Defensive and Offensive Efficiency? A watered down league, all the dynastic teams now are a freak of injury or trade leading to two big time players in one place - Shaq/Kobe, MJ/Pippen, Duncan/Admiral, etc. The Celts were not a 2 man team. No response I see to the domination in the paint mentioned by me and other posters. What about Walton, think Longley can handle him?



Also the next year Magic and Kareem lost in the 1st round to a team under .500


That is all about the inability of Kareem to handle big tough centers. it happened a couple of years later again. Don't be looking at Magic for either.

Look, MJ is great as a #2, I got him as a starter on my team. But Magic is my #1. But the teams since the Pistons 2nd title team are constructed in a different fashion, and are all thinner then the 80's teams. At some point the athletic difference will get great enough that the 80's teams will be eclipsed. This years Celts probably could have beaten 16 of the last 20 champs, and probably 3-5 of the 80's teams.

Go read my baseball stuff, I'm no misty eyed guy for the past, but the game and the teams were simply better in the 80's. Someday it will not be true, but its not the "bull" teams of the 90's that prove it.

ink
08-06-2008, 11:15 PM
including that wizards team?? :D

touche

JordansBulls
08-06-2008, 11:34 PM
Number one, I said MJ would win the battle, but that DJ was good enough to fire back a few times. Who won that series BTW? You're telling me that Bulls team had an offense superior the Celts of 86?

Defensive and Offensive Efficiency? A watered down league, all the dynastic teams now are a freak of injury or trade leading to two big time players in one place - Shaq/Kobe, MJ/Pippen, Duncan/Admiral, etc. The Celts were not a 2 man team. No response I see to the domination in the paint mentioned by me and other posters. What about Walton, think Longley can handle him?


Has any other team led in Defensive and OFFensive Efficiency?

Didn't think so. I base my information on facts on things that actually happened because anyone could reason any other way without facts.

Also the Shaq/Kobe duo didn't come about in an instant nor did the MJ/Pippen duo because neither Kobe or Pippen were immediate impacts. For Pippen it took 3-4 years and the same for Kobe.

Big deal that the Celtics were not a 2 man team, they never played a defensive team like the Bulls and better yet Bird never had to deal with a prime MJ or Pippen on defense.


That is all about the inability of Kareem to handle big tough centers. it happened a couple of years later again. Don't be looking at Magic for either.




Look, MJ is great as a #2, I got him as a starter on my team. But Magic is my #1. But the teams since the Pistons 2nd title team are constructed in a different fashion, and are all thinner then the 80's teams. At some point the athletic difference will get great enough that the 80's teams will be eclipsed. This years Celts probably could have beaten 16 of the last 20 champs, and probably 3-5 of the 80's teams.

Go read my baseball stuff, I'm no misty eyed guy for the past, but the game and the teams were simply better in the 80's. Someday it will not be true, but its not the "bull" teams of the 90's that prove it.


That's fine that Magic was your #1.

I kinda find it funny you mention Magic as your #1 and yet you mention someone like Hakeem as the greatest Center. That seems kinda contradictory doesn't it? You take a guy as your #1 who wasn't known as a good defender and then you base your reasoning for taking Hakeem at Center because of his defense and offense. Which is it? Can't have it both ways.

As far as MJ and Magic, well this has been debated over and over again and I love both players.

Magic was great, but IMO how can you be considered the best of all time if you were not great on both ends? This is a big reason why MJ, Kareem and Wilt are the 3 most talked about for GOAT. Because while Russell has the titles and the defense, he wasn't great on offense. Magic has the offense and playmaking ability but he wasn't great on defense.

As for why Jordan is usually the majority pick for GOAT over those two in particular (disregarding Wilt/Kareem etc.), there are a couple of reasons:


- Statistical dominance. Though Magic and Bird both put up otherworldly numbers, Jordan's production-- and not just in terms of scoring-- was stratospheric for a non-center. Jordan's average EFF (a cumulative stat that takes into account all the statistical categories and measures overall statistical impact) upon his retirement in 1993 was an astonishing 32.9. And that's an 8 season average. By comparison, Magic only topped 32.9 on one occasion, and even then just barely (33.3 EFF in '88-'89). Bird topped 32.9 on a few occasions (with EFF's of 34.3, 34.4, and 34.0), but his average EFF from 1980-1990 (not counting his last two seasons due to injuries) was "only" 30.4. Jordan's single season high in EFF was 37.0, and he topped 34 two other times as well (34.6 and 35.1). And Jordan led in PER 7x, while Bird and Magic did so only once and MJ has the highest PER ever recorded at 27.91 with Shaq being 2nd.


- Achievements, such as MVP's, Finals MVP's, DPOY award, and first-team and defensive first-team selections. Jordan had 5 MVP's to Magic and Bird's 3 apiece; he had 6 Finals MVP's to Magic's 3 and Bird's 2. He had a DPOY award that Magic and Bird could never hope to get. He had 10 all-NBA first-team selections to Magic's 9 and Bird's 9. Yes, Magic would have had more had he not retired and Bird would've had more if not for injuries, but Jordan would have also had 2 more had he not retired in '93, and likely a third had he not broken his foot in '86, so it's no use playing the "what if" game. Jordan also had 9 defensive first-team selections to Magic's none and Bird's 3 defensive second-team selections.


- Championships. Simply put, Jordan (6) has more than either Bird (3) or Magic (5). Yes, Bird and Magic had to beat each other for rings, which precluded either of them from getting more, but they each also had tons more help than Jordan did. Regardless, arguments about league strength aside, Jordan just has more, and his period of dominance was longer than Magic or Bird's. Also, this is only one aspect of the overall picture, so even if you feel that MJ's 6 rings don't hold as much weight as Magic's 5 (though I personally feel that the strength of Magic's supporting cast relative to Jordan's is enough to counterbalance the supposedly "weaker era" and make them relatively equal accomplishments)-- but if you disagree, then just realize that this is only one aspect of a larger picture.


- Overall skill. All three were among the top 5 or 6 most skilled players of all-time imo, and each had advantages over the others in various areas. Bird was the best rebounder of the bunch, Magic the best passer, Jordan the best scorer and defender. However, in their respective primes, the edges that Bird and Magic had on Jordan in these categories is not as large as the edge that Jordan had on Magic and Bird in his pet categories. For example, in his prime, Bird was capable of getting 13-17 rebounds on any given night, while in his prime, Jordan was capable of grabbing 11-14 rebounds on any given night. Magic in his prime could dish out 13-17 assists on any given night, whereas Jordan in his prime could dish out 10-14 assists on any given night. However, scoring-wise, Jordan was good for 45-55 on any given night while Bird was good for about 35-40 or so on any given night, and Magic "only" about 30-35.

Also defensively, Jordan was capable of disrupting entire teams' offenses in a way that neither Magic nor Bird were ever remotely capable of; he was also capable of playing lock-down defense, which neither of them really could, and he did so fairly consistently. I have a game vs. Boston on DVD from '88 where Jordan has 8 steals at the half, and Boston literally could not run the plays they wanted to because of Jordan's presence on the court. Bird looked exasperated. He could almost singlehandedly take opposing big men out of the game with his help defense from up top and the weak side. At any rate, the gap in defense between Jordan and Magic/Bird is much more significant than Bird's edge in rebounding and Magic's edge in passing in their respective primes imo. At the very least, these 3 are a wash skill-wise.


- Clutch play and dominance. Magic was clutch, to be certain, even if his clutchness often manifested itself in different ways than MJ's clutchness usually did. Bird was, obviously, a top 3 clutch player all-time (along w/Jordan and West imo), so he's in that conversation. Still, Jordan is generally considered to be the most clutch of the three, though it's not a huge advantage by any means. While all three were capable of beating you with the shot, rebound, or pass (some better than others in each category, but all capable), Jordan was a clutch defender as well, and could come up with the key block or steal or denial of a shot attempt by his man when it counted to a far greater degree than either Bird or Magic. Bird and Magic made up for their comparative lack of defensive ability with their canniness (e.g., Bird's steal vs. Detroit in the ECF), but it wasn't nearly on the same level as Jordan. Also, of the two, only Bird approaches Jordan's dominance over the league in terms of "who is the biggest bad guy? Who don't you want to piss off?" Bird was a bad, bad man. Jordan was badder, and he maintained that status for longer (through no fault of Bird's own; his injuries really robbed him of a few of his prime years).


You put all these things together and it's difficult to pick Magic or Bird over Jordan, for me at least. I have no problem admitting that all are on the same relative level, however-- Bird especially, since he's my second favorite player after Jordan. If Bird's prime wasn't cut short, he would've went down as better than Magic imo, since his peak play ('84-'86) was better than Magic's peak play ('86-'89). Like Jerry West said of Jordan in 1993: "he's the best offensive player in the league, he's the best defensive player in the league, and he's the best competitor, playing on a team that, while suited to him, is not an ideal team. He carries that team; and very rarely do you see players carry teams to victories, much less championships. And if there's ever going to be a player who comes along that's better, I think we're all going to be sitting here scratching our heads."

bagwell368
08-07-2008, 04:57 PM
[QUOTE]
- Statistical dominance. Though Magic and Bird both put up otherworldly numbers, Jordan's production-- and not just in terms of scoring-- was stratospheric for a non-center. Jordan's average EFF (a cumulative stat that takes into account all the statistical categories and measures overall statistical impact) upon his retirement in 1993 was an astonishing 32.9. And that's an 8 season average. By comparison, Magic only topped 32.9 on one occasion, and even then just barely (33.3 EFF in '88-'89). Bird topped 32.9 on a few occasions (with EFF's of 34.3, 34.4, and 34.0), but his average EFF from 1980-1990 (not counting his last two seasons due to injuries) was "only" 30.4. Jordan's single season high in EFF was 37.0, and he topped 34 two other times as well (34.6 and 35.1). And Jordan led in PER 7x, while Bird and Magic did so only once and MJ has the highest PER ever recorded at 27.91 with Shaq being 2nd.

Soooooo much easier on a team where you get to call out eveyone (and do) for being a stiff besides your sidekick with the willing help of your zen master coach. (sorry personal aside: I played ball against old Jackson 4 times in the summer of 1987. Johnny Most had it right, he was a dirty elbow throwing son of a *****, but given I was near my prime at age 30, I outplayed his butt no problem.)



- Championships. Simply put, Jordan (6) has more than either Bird (3) or Magic (5). Yes, Bird and Magic had to beat each other for rings, which precluded either of them from getting more, but they each also had tons more help than Jordan did. Regardless, arguments about league strength aside, Jordan just has more, and his period of dominance was longer than Magic or Bird's. Also, this is only one aspect of the overall picture, so even if you feel that MJ's 6 rings don't hold as much weight as Magic's 5 (though I personally feel that the strength of Magic's supporting cast relative to Jordan's is enough to counterbalance the supposedly "weaker era" and make them relatively equal accomplishments)-- but if you disagree, then just realize that this is only one aspect of a larger picture.

Let's see what would have been with Len Bias alive and not dead. Maybe not 8, but I'm thinking 5-6 for Bird, and 2-3 for Magic. PLUS, with a non watered down league its harder to win. You cannot seriously maintain that the Bulls had anything to deal with like the NBA of the 80's.

Thinking of that what if game, what if Akeem had gotten Pippen and Jackson and not Jordan? Akeem had one guy for two years of anything near his prime, and won both times. w/o Pippen, I think Jordan's ring number goes down to 1 or 2, and he turns out to be this generations Wilt.



- Overall skill. All three were among the top 5 or 6 most skilled players of all-time imo, and each had advantages over the others in various areas. Bird was the best rebounder of the bunch, Magic the best passer, Jordan the best scorer and defender. However, in their respective primes, the edges that Bird and Magic had on Jordan in these categories is not as large as the edge that Jordan had on Magic and Bird in his pet categories. For example, in his prime, Bird was capable of getting 13-17 rebounds on any given night, while in his prime, Jordan was capable of grabbing 11-14 rebounds on any given night. Magic in his prime could dish out 13-17 assists on any given night, whereas Jordan in his prime could dish out 10-14 assists on any given night. However, scoring-wise, Jordan was good for 45-55 on any given night while Bird was good for about 35-40 or so on any given night, and Magic "only" about 30-35.

Crap. Bird was a better defensive rebounder 96% of the times he played a game. Magic was probably better then MJ 85% of the time. Bird also passed MUCH better then MJ. Why not mention that? It's not even close. You want to talk about a big D edge, why not a big passing edge for both over MJ?

I use stats more then almost anybody at PSD, but to talk about Bird and Magic as if they lacked something compared to MJ because they scored less is a joke. They were better teammates, better facilitators (assists), and played on teams with a lot more options then them. All MJ had to worry about was his sneaker ads, and dishing a few scraps to keep Pippen happy.

Obviously MJ was more physically gifted then the other two. And Jackson was able to help him bring that off, and the weakness of the league was shown by the dominance of a small man in a big mans game. Only Akeem of the super elite players had his career at the same relative time and he was cursed with first the remnants of the earlier Rockets shots at winning and that waste of space - Sampson. Later, he got to lead a team of nothings where the best player might be Reid one year, Thorpe the next. Drexler had enough gas in the tank to help take one. The other year was Thorpe, Maxwell, Smith, and Horry. I don't see any Pippens on that list - nor any McHales or DJ's either.

The original point of the thread was the two teams - not MJ.

As you have said, Bird was at the same general level as MJ. Pippen was very good too. But what they hell are the Bulls going to do with Parish, Bird, McHale, and Walton??? Even if they handle Parish, and partially stop Bird, and Walton is too old to do much more then 14 minutes of damage, they you are stuck w/ McHale (capable of 60) ready to take those counfounded fall aways, and that nasty low post stuff right down your throats.

Celts are too deep, too tough.

JordansBulls
08-07-2008, 06:06 PM
[QUOTE=JordansBulls;6185390]

Let's see what would have been with Len Bias alive and not dead. Maybe not 8, but I'm thinking 5-6 for Bird, and 2-3 for Magic. PLUS, with a non watered down league its harder to win. You cannot seriously maintain that the Bulls had anything to deal with like the NBA of the 80's.

Thinking of that what if game, what if Akeem had gotten Pippen and Jackson and not Jordan? Akeem had one guy for two years of anything near his prime, and won both times. w/o Pippen, I think Jordan's ring number goes down to 1 or 2, and he turns out to be this generations Wilt.




Too bad we are basing things on teams that actually existed and not what ifs.

Bird played in the 90's as well and didn't win. So maybe the 80's were the watered down league. Jordan still won titles at 35. Bird didn't so maybe Bird didn't have competition either.

See if you are going to talk about eras just being watered down or whatever and not basing things on what actually happened and how each team performed then I might as well come back at you with the same logic.

GregOden#1
08-07-2008, 07:08 PM
Too bad we are basing things on teams that actually existed and not what ifs.

Bird played in the 90's as well and didn't win. So maybe the 80's were the watered down league. Jordan still won titles at 35. Bird didn't so maybe Bird didn't have competition either.

See if you are going to talk about eras just being watered down or whatever and not basing things on what actually happened and how each team performed then I might as well come back at you with the same logic.

Yeah your right. Because Bird didn't win a championship in the 90s means the 80s was a watered down league. Didn't have anything to do with his back problems or something.

You're not using the same logic that he used, he said that expansion causes talent dilution, which is true. Now he's been wrong on pretty much everything else, and you probably could've ran with almost anything else he posted, but instead you decided to pick the one thing he was right about.

JordansBulls
08-07-2008, 07:43 PM
Yeah your right. Because Bird didn't win a championship in the 90s means the 80s was a watered down league. Didn't have anything to do with his back problems or something.

You're not using the same logic that he used, he said that expansion causes talent dilution, which is true. Now he's been wrong on pretty much everything else, and you probably could've ran with almost anything else he posted, but instead you decided to pick the one thing he was right about.

You are correct sir, it just funny that he mentions that stuff and then mentions Wilt having only 2 rings, but yet he thinks Hakeem is the greatest center ever when he doesn't have any more rings than that. Then he says Hakeem won in his prime when he had help, but that wasn't even the case.

Playoff Magic
08-07-2008, 07:49 PM
fellas, let's get real.... the best team of all time was the 88 Lakers,

Scott
Johnson
Abdul-Jabar
Worthy
AC Green

with Cooper off the bench!!

wouldn't it be great to see the 96 bulls and the 88 lakers go at it their prime??? I'll put my money on the Lake Show anytime.

JordansBulls
08-07-2008, 07:51 PM
fellas, let's get real.... the best team of all time was the 88 Lakers,

Scott
Johnson
Abdul-Jabar
Worthy
AC Green

with Cooper off the bench!!

wouldn't it be great to see the 96 bulls and the 88 lakers go at it their prime??? I'll put my money on the Lake Show anytime.

The '88 Lakers went 7 games in the semifinals, conference finals and nba finals and Kareem was virtually done at that time.

I think you are referring to the '87 Lakers, but why are we mentioning the Lakers in a thread is specifically talking about two teams in general?

Playoff Magic
08-10-2008, 07:09 PM
87/88 Lakers were the best.


I know we're only talking celts/bulls but the Lake Show should've been included in the discussion as the best team ever.

Tom81
08-11-2008, 07:19 AM
Bulls

op12
08-12-2008, 10:30 PM
celtics, no doubt.

Sir Charles
08-14-2008, 10:16 PM
Some Basketball Laws:

LAW 1: A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team with a Good Defensive Frontline but A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline (The 90s Bulls) can Beat A Team that has: an "Average to Bad Offensive/Defensive Frontline" and an "Good, Average or Bad" Offensive/Defensisve Backcourt

= Most of the 1990s Teams the Bulls faced :confusedshrug:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LAW 2: A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team with a Good Defensive Frontline but A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline (The 90s Bulls) will have A Hard Time Beating A Team that has: a "Great Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Defensive Backcourt" but with a "Bad Offensive Frontline" and Good "Offensive Backcourt"

= 1980s Pistons (owned the Bulls from 1984 to 1990) :confusedshrug:


*With Adrian Dantley they would have had not a "Good Offensive Backcourt" but a "Great Offensive Backcourt". So that would have persented even more trouble for the Bulls...

...As it did from 1987 to 1989 :)

LAW 3: A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team with a Good Defensive Frontline but A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline (The 90s Bulls) will have even a harder time Beating A Team that has: a "Great Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Defensive Backcourt" with an "Average to Good Offensive Frontline" and an "Average to Bad Offensive Backcourt"

= Early 1990s Knicks (took them To Game 7 in 1992)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*The Knicks Just Needed an Offensive Weopon (apart from Ewing) in either one of their Frontline Forward Spots.:)

LAW 4: "A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team" with a "Good Defensive Frontline" but "A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline" (The 90s Bulls)Most Probably Not Win Over A Team that has: a "Good Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Offense Frontline" with an "Average to Good Defensive Backcourt" and "A Great Offensive Backcourt"

=1980s Showtime Lakers. Especially the 1985 to 1987 Lakers with Kareem-Magic and Worthy together plus their Supporting Casts of Scott, Thompson, Cooper, Green, Rambis.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Finally....

LAW 5: "A Great Offensive and Defensive Perimeter Oriented Back Court Team" with a "Good Defensive Frontline" but "A Bad to Average Offensive Frontline" (The 90s Bulls) Has No No Chance :no: In Beating A Team that has: a "Great Defensive Frontline" and a "Great Offensive Frontline with "Good Offensive Backcourt" and an "Great Defensive Backcourt"

=1986 Celtics with McHale-Bird-Parish-Walton-Ainge-DJ-Kite-Wedman, Siesting.

The only way fro the Bulls to try to win some games is quite simple:

Locate Pippen as the PG for Most of the Game and Kukoc at the SF for Most of the game. This way with Kukoc and Pippen both in you would have more Scoring Possibilites but then again with No Pippen in the SF spot = you would have a WEAKER DEFENSE for the Likes of Bird-McHale-Parish and Walton (Yes the Celtics Strenght = Frontline Offense and Defense!).

If you put Harper in for Pippen as a PG and Pippen as the SF for Most of the Game you will

1st- Loose Creative Possibilities to make the Frontline Offense Score and

2nd- Consume Pippen. Whom cannot asoume the role of trying to:

1st: Try to Stop: PRIME Larry Bird!
2nd: Become the Second Scoring Threat after Jordan,
3rd: Rebound over PRIME Bird-PRIME McHale-PRIME Parish-Walton and
4th: Create as a Point-Forward.

= Simply To much Load for Pip.

Matchups

Backcourt:

Jordan vs Ainge/DJ: Jordan Would Own Danny Ainge Offensively but still would not prevent him from Scoring Outside Shots.

(JORDAN WINS!)

Harper vs Ainge: Both will go at it with Harper having the edge in his Drives but then again this is Prime Ainge and Old Harper

(Ballanced Match Up)

Frontline

McHale vs Rodman : Rodman Would get Owned by a 1986 McHale Offensively and Defensively. Rodman will only Outrebound McHale but would Not Stop Him from Scoring Nor Score on Him.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=mchalke01&p2=rodmade01

Mchale: 22.5 PPG (57.9% FG), 8.8 RPG; 1.5 BPG vs Rodman.

This is counting stats from 1990-91 to 1992-93 = A 33 to 35 year old Mchale not a Prime 1985-86 McHale at age: 28! :banghead:

(McHALE WINS!)

Bird vs Pippen-Kukoc. Bird would own both of them Offensively and Rebounding Wise. None will Prevent Bird from owning the Boards, Posting Up for his 12-15 Jumpers, Scoring in other ways and Making Great Passes for Parish-McHale-Walton or even spoting up DJ or Ainge for Open Shots after Pick & Rolls made by the Frontline.:confusedshrug:

Pippen will Challange Bird in the Perimeter but Bird always will do what he used to do against faster players. Just wait closer to his Frontline to assure rebounds waiting for Pippen to Shoot from the Outside, which = Pippen`s Not a Reliable Open Shooter.

Kukoc will Challange Bird in the Post but then then again Bird will have an easier time Offensively with Kukoc than with Pippen (because Pippen is obviously a better Defender).

Reminder***Bird owned Pippen from 1988 to 1992

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=birdla01&p2=pippesc01

But remember this time we are talking not about a 31 to 35 year old Bird but a Prime 23 to 29 year old Bird. And yes Before his injury in 1989 :confusedshrug:

(BIRD WINS!)

Parish vs Bulls Center: Any Bull`s Center would get Owned by a 1986 Parish both Offensively and Defensively.

(PARISH WINS!)

Then agin if Rodman needs a Pounding, The Celtics will just put in Walton for a Twin Tower System with Parish and McHale, putting Bird as a SG for some minutes and then later put in 6`11 ft and 250 lbs Greg Kite = A Dennis Rodman like type agressive Paint Player that was famous for brawls. Not to mention the guy was a 9.3 R.P/36 Minutes.


RESUME OF THE LAWS:

"A Great Frontline (Composed of 3 Players) Will Always Own a Good/Great Backcourt (Composed of 2 Players) " .:hammerhead:

Examples:

2008 Finals Lakers v.s Celtics Result = Same would happen to the 95-96 Bulls if they faced a 1985-86 Celtics

* In the Case of the Bulls. The Bulls can only assure one spot in the Game Matchups of Total Ownership by Jordan = that is Jordan vs Ainge/DJ.

Harper vs Ainge is a Ballanced Won.

The Rest of the Matchups:

Bird vs Pippen: Bird Wins
McHale vs Rodman: Mchale Wins
Parish vs Bulls Center= Parish Total Ownership!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 1995-96 Bulls Have "Very Little Chances" of Beating a 1984-85/1986-87 Lakers and

Pretty Much "No Chance" in Beating a 1985-86 Celtics (Greatest Team Ever)

Beno7500
08-14-2008, 10:26 PM
How are we supposed to know who would win?