PDA

View Full Version : '95-'96 Bulls vs '14-'15 Warriors in 7: Who wins?



Pages : [1] 2 3

lol, please
06-17-2015, 12:04 AM
Two of the greatest teams of all time. Who wins?

xnick5757
06-17-2015, 12:06 AM
Bulls in 4, maybe 5

Avenged
06-17-2015, 12:06 AM
Colby brian

Raps18-19 Champ
06-17-2015, 12:06 AM
Bulls in 5 quite easily.

Pippen on Curry?

ILLUSIONIST^248
06-17-2015, 12:07 AM
Colby brianthis

sportsfanatic99
06-17-2015, 12:07 AM
Easily Bulls. probably in 5 if not 4

kozelkid
06-17-2015, 12:09 AM
Bulls would be an AWFUL match up for the Warriors as they had the versatility to easily play small ball with the Warriors. While I doubt they'd sweep them, it wouldn't go more than 6 at most.

Hangtime
06-17-2015, 12:13 AM
Bulls would sweep the Warriors. It probably would get ugly.

DaBear
06-17-2015, 12:14 AM
Bulls

ChI_ShIzzLe
06-17-2015, 12:15 AM
There is no comparison to that Bulls team. Not even close.

Hangtime
06-17-2015, 12:17 AM
Steve Kerr would have to coach against himself.

InRoseWeTrust
06-17-2015, 12:19 AM
Not that I'm biased, but Bulls in 2. :)

still1ballin
06-17-2015, 12:21 AM
Colby brian

Ze gratest

IBleedPurple
06-17-2015, 12:22 AM
Bulls by halftime of game 1. Not even close. Stop. This Warriors team likely couldn't beat the majority of the NBA Champs this century.

goingfor28
06-17-2015, 01:23 AM
Bulls in 4. 5 max

JasonJohnHorn
06-17-2015, 01:39 AM
Bulls. Easily.

This Warriors team was a GREAT regular season team. AMAZING. But they were also a VERY FAWKING LUCKY playoff team. The two best teams outside of them play each other the first round due to fawked up seeding. The winning team then loses to an injury plagued Rockets team. And then a healthy Warriors squad goes on to walk through two injury depleted teams to the championship.

I don't say that to take away from what they did. They earned it. But you put them in the conversation with the Bulls? No way. The Bulls had three guys with multiple titles (Jordan, Pippen, Rodman), AND Phil Jackson, not to mention, if the Bulls take Steve Kerr, the Warriors don't even have a coach ;-)

Serisouly... watching the Warriors this series, they seemed complacent at times, knowing they were going to win. You let your guard down like that for one quarter against Jordan's Bulls, and they will sap every ounce of confidence you thought you had.

Bulls were a better team, with a better coach, better defenders, better players, and more experience.

Bulls in 5 or 6.

I mean, come on.... this Warriors team was a free-throw away from being down 0-3 to a team that was starting Delladova and Mosgov. Whose second best player this series was likely J.R. Smith or T. Thompson.

If you can't sweep that team, there is NO WAY you'd be able to stand toe-to-toe with Jrodan's Bulls.

Sadds The Gr8
06-17-2015, 01:45 AM
Colby brian

:laugh::laugh:

I don't know why but this made me bust out laughing

bucketss
06-17-2015, 01:46 AM
bulls sweep.

ewing
06-17-2015, 01:52 AM
really?

Mave1002
06-17-2015, 03:14 AM
Im a Lakers fan but ive been following the Dubs lately. Love watching them play but against the Bulls? barring injuries, I see MJ and the unstoppabulls winning in 5 games. 1st game to the Dubs.

Big Zo
06-17-2015, 09:07 AM
Bulls would just fall asleep from boredom, and just let the Warriors win.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-17-2015, 09:42 AM
Bulls in 4 is most likely but I said Bulls in 5 just for some margin of error. Jordan would blanket Curry in a way Delly could not imagine. Pippen would blanket Klay. Jordan and Pippen would love driving the lane with no shot blocker to fear. The Bulls would dominate on the boards as well.

valade16
06-17-2015, 09:45 AM
The Warriors successfully stopped the Cavs by not double teaming Bron and making him both score and create for a team that was sorely lacking in playmakers outside of LeBron. They wouldn't be able to do that to the Bulls.

1st, even Iggy one on one with MJ would be a recipe for disaster, he wouldn't be able to sag off like he did to Bron and dare MJ to shoot because he was a far better shooter than Bron from midrange. MJ was also quicker in that season IMO than Bron is now so he'd be able to turn the corner on Iggy more.

Also, having Pippen offensively would have done wonders for the Cavs offense. The Warriors defense wouldn't be able to sit back and watch MJ go ISO with Pippen there.

Finally, TT dominated the Warriors on the boards when they went small. Rodman is perhaps the greatest rebounder ever, the disparity on the boards would be every bit as bad as it was this series but they'd be facing a far more potent offense and a truly insane defense.

The Bulls wouldn't have to double Curry off screens nearly as much as the Cavs did because their defenders are long and quick enough to keep Curry in front of them and with MJ, Pippen and Rodman Curry wouldn't be able to create mismatches against an inferior defender as well. He would still do very well because he's Curry, but he'd have a tough time making the game as easy for his teammates as he did in the Cavs series.

Consider that Bulls team had Pippen, MJ and Rodman all make the Defensive 1st team. That is insane.

Bulls would win the series pretty comfortably IMO.

kdspurman
06-17-2015, 09:52 AM
I don't think it'd be close. Bulls in 5. GS didn't look nearly that dominant despite playing an undermanned team. It's just new territory for them, so it's not too surprising. But Bulls pretty easily for me

SLY WILLIAMS
06-17-2015, 09:56 AM
The Warriors are a very good team that had a great season BUT they are not an all time great team.

kdspurman
06-17-2015, 10:13 AM
The Warriors are a very good team that had a great season BUT they are not an all time great team.

Yea I agree with this. If they can keep that core together, they've got potential to be.

jimm120
06-17-2015, 10:44 AM
I don't know what you saw, but the Warriors had a HORRIBLE Finals.

Thompson wasn't that good all series long.
Curry was bad in games 1, 2, and most of 3. And merely good (not great) in games 4, 5, and 6.
Iguodala was the mvp, and he was simply going around getting around 15 points and missing free throws all over the place.

That said, The Warriors of the season and playoffs were damn good. But the Warriors that played in the finals...sheesh.

Bigdaddyburch
06-17-2015, 10:45 AM
4 game sweep for the Bulls. GS would have to cover the whole floor and not just concentrate on Jordan like they did James. Really they should have swept the Cavs. They only had one guy to stop. The Bulls would have.

JordansBulls
06-17-2015, 10:50 AM
Every team that wins each year doesn't need to be compared to the 1996 Bulls. Only a few teams that have won deserve to be. The better thread is who wins 2015 Warriors or 2014 Spurs or 2015 Warriors vs 2013 Heat, 2012 Heat, 2011 Mavs, 2012 Thunder. All of those are good threads.

PhillyFaninLA
06-17-2015, 11:10 AM
The Warriors lost 2 games to a depleted team with one real player and adequate support players. The Bulls teams where full of upper tier specialist and MJ and Pippen. I don't see a close game.

NYKalltheway
06-17-2015, 01:22 PM
lol Bulls in 3, Warriors won't even play in the 4th one :D

papipapsmanny
06-17-2015, 01:28 PM
Haha, Bulls.

You aren't stopping Jordan either way.

The wing perimeter defense would kill the Warriors.... and who is going to be there to rebound?

That team was okay MJ score a lot and play your D. Everyone else play D and rebound, and score when you can

papipapsmanny
06-17-2015, 01:29 PM
4 game sweep for the Bulls. GS would have to cover the whole floor and not just concentrate on Jordan like they did James. Really they should have swept the Cavs. They only had one guy to stop. The Bulls would have.

That wouldn't even matter if they did

ManningToTyree
06-17-2015, 01:30 PM
Bulls in an *** kicking

Lol, please

Vinylman
06-17-2015, 01:36 PM
Dubs fans have obviously been drinking all night...

Enjoy your chip... probably won't happen again in the near term.

Bigdaddyburch
06-17-2015, 02:00 PM
The Warriors lost 2 games to a depleted team with one real player and adequate support players. The Bulls teams where full of upper tier specialist and MJ and Pippen. I don't see a close game.

Warrior fans will say that outside James the talent level on both teams were equal and that had James just played less they would have won.

Raidaz4Life
06-17-2015, 03:22 PM
Bulls in 3

Wrigheyes4MVP
06-17-2015, 03:29 PM
If you actually factor in the fact that players are bigger and more athletic today than they were 20 years ago and are also better shooters and more skilled... then this argument is actually a valid one. Based on that, I might even be inclined to go with the Warriors, but IDK. We'll never know the true impact of teams from different eras squaring off.

But the Bulls were a more dominant team amongst their peers. They should be considered a superior team based on that. If you neutralize the 20 years of human evolution argument... Bulls in 5 or 6.

While we are on the subject though... Lets say this Dubs team faced the 2002 Kings (yes, I'm a Kings fan). Who wins? I think that would be pretty fun to watch.

lol, please
06-17-2015, 04:16 PM
The Warriors are a very good team that had a great season BUT they are not an all time great team.

I disagree wholeheartedly.

So, because the Warriors didn't dominate the Cavs and sweep them, all of the sudden they aren't one of the best teams in history? a 7 game sample size trumps a full regular season I guess.

KnicksorBust
06-17-2015, 04:26 PM
Warriors in 7

valade16
06-17-2015, 04:47 PM
I disagree wholeheartedly.

So, because the Warriors didn't dominate the Cavs and sweep them, all of the sudden they aren't one of the best teams in history? a 7 game sample size trumps a full regular season I guess.

It did in the case of the 06-07 Dallas Mavericks, or do you think they are one of the best teams ever despite their 1st round exit?

nandovelez
06-17-2015, 04:57 PM
it be hard for golden state to score or even get a decent shot with pippen Jordan and Harper, I say bulls in 4 maybe a small chance 5

Bruno
06-17-2015, 05:00 PM
The Warriors would be the Bulls with todays rules in six or seven games.

under the 90s rules? Sweep for Chicago.

papipapsmanny
06-17-2015, 05:09 PM
Doesn't matter what era or rules, the Bulls would kill them. Jordan will efficiently put his points up no matter what the Warriors do. The Bulls would kill them on the boards. And the Perimeter defense would limit the Warriors shooters.

Really don't see how anyone can say that the Warriors would win this

KnicksorBust
06-17-2015, 05:11 PM
Doesn't matter what era or rules, the Bulls would kill them. Jordan will efficiently put his points up no matter what the Warriors do. The Bulls would kill them on the boards. And the Perimeter defense would limit the Warriors shooters.

Really don't see how anyone can say that the Warriors would win this

What is so hard? They have the best shooting backcourt ever and are an elite defensive team.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-17-2015, 05:12 PM
I disagree wholeheartedly.

So, because the Warriors didn't dominate the Cavs and sweep them, all of the sudden they aren't one of the best teams in history? a 7 game sample size trumps a full regular season I guess.

They never were one of the best teams in history. They are a good team that had a great season and deserve props for that but they are not a great team. The Bulls would destroy them. So would the 86 Celtics. So would the Showtime Lakers. So would the Shaq Lakers and Duncan Spurs. The Moses Malone 76ers probably would as well. Maybe even the Kareem Bucks.

Winning 60 plus games is a great season but does not make the team a great team. Dallas won 67 one year and lost in the first round. I like GS. I have rooted for GS in one way or another since Chris Mullin but GS is not a great team. I would be shocked if they win 60 games next season and even more shocked for them to repeat.

Curry is a great player. Klay is a good player. Some of the best teams in history had 3-4-5 Hall Of Fame players on them. You should enjoy winning the championship instead of worrying about how the Warriors would do matched up with all time great teams.

soonabooma
06-17-2015, 05:12 PM
I hope this was intended to be a joke because golden state is not even close to being one of the greatest teams of all time. They would easily be one of the weakest championship teams in history. Heck, the 2012 Thunder would beat the brakes off of those guys and they didn't even win the title that year.

LakerShow
06-17-2015, 05:21 PM
Samaki walker

Bruno
06-17-2015, 05:25 PM
Doesn't matter what era or rules, the Bulls would kill them. Jordan will efficiently put his points up no matter what the Warriors do. The Bulls would kill them on the boards. And the Perimeter defense would limit the Warriors shooters.

Really don't see how anyone can say that the Warriors would win this


it does. if the rules didn't matter or didn't have an impact on game play we wouldn't have watched the game change as drastically as it has since 1998.

KnicksorBust
06-17-2015, 05:27 PM
I disagree wholeheartedly.

So, because the Warriors didn't dominate the Cavs and sweep them, all of the sudden they aren't one of the best teams in history? a 7 game sample size trumps a full regular season I guess.

They never were one of the best teams in history. They are a good team that had a great season and deserve props for that but they are not a great team. The Bulls would destroy them. So would the 86 Celtics. So would the Showtime Lakers. So would the Shaq Lakers and Duncan Spurs. The Moses Malone 76ers probably would as well. Maybe even the Kareem Bucks.

Winning 60 plus games is a great season but does not make the team a great team. Dallas won 67 one year and lost in the first round. I like GS. I have rooted for GS in one way or another since Chris Mullin but GS is not a great team. I would be shocked if they win 60 games next season and even more shocked for them to repeat.

Curry is a great player. Klay is a good player. Some of the best teams in history had 3-4-5 Hall Of Fame players on them. You should enjoy winning the championship instead of worrying about how the Warriors would do matched up with all time great teams.

What would happen if the 67 win Mavs played the 67 win Warriors?

valade16
06-17-2015, 05:27 PM
What is so hard? They have the best shooting backcourt ever and are an elite defensive team.

The best shooting backcourt faces possibly the best perimeter defending team in history in terms of individual defenders.

I think GS would stand a better chance if they went big honestly, but if they went with their small ball lineup of
Curry, Klay, Barnes, Iggy, Green Chicago could go Harper, MJ, Pippen, Kuckoc, Rodman and they would have plenty of perimeter defense to keep the shooters in check and still have a decided edge on the boards.

valade16
06-17-2015, 05:28 PM
What would happen if the 67 win Mavs played the 67 win Warriors?

Considering the 67 win Mavs team lost because GS employed an extreme small ball lineup very reminiscent of what we saw from the Warriors this season I'd say the Warriors would beat the Mavs.

bgdreton
06-17-2015, 05:29 PM
Based on the way the game is played now it would be difficult to guess. If I did have to guess I would say the Bulls in 7 only bc of Jordan. I actually think it would be good series. Other than Rodman they don't have anyone that could hurt us down low. Small ball line up would do pretty well on those bulls. However if u thought lebron went off well Jordan would be you know Jordan.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-17-2015, 05:32 PM
What would happen if the 67 win Mavs played the 67 win Warriors?

That is a really good question. I honestly can not say for sure but because GS did make the finals and win the championship I would have to give them the benefit of the doubt.

valade16
06-17-2015, 05:33 PM
That is a really good question since Dallas lost to Duncan's Spurs who went on to win the championship that season. Ironically that is the year they swept the Cavs. I honestly can not say for sure but because GS did make the finals and win the championship I would have to give them the benefit of the doubt.

The 67 win Mavs team lost to the Warriors in the 1st round...

SLY WILLIAMS
06-17-2015, 05:34 PM
The 67 win Mavs team lost to the Warriors in the 1st round...

You are right. I edited my post once I realized I mixed up the years where the Spurs beat the Mavs. My bad.

KnicksorBust
06-17-2015, 05:34 PM
What is so hard? They have the best shooting backcourt ever and are an elite defensive team.

The best shooting backcourt faces possibly the best perimeter defending team in history in terms of individual defenders.

I think GS would stand a better chance if they went big honestly, but if they went with their small ball lineup of
Curry, Klay, Barnes, Iggy, Green Chicago could go Harper, MJ, Pippen, Kuckoc, Rodman and they would have plenty of perimeter defense to keep the shooters in check and still have a decided edge on the boards.

How do you see it playing out?

papipapsmanny
06-17-2015, 06:14 PM
Based on the way the game is played now it would be difficult to guess. If I did have to guess I would say the Bulls in 7 only bc of Jordan. I actually think it would be good series. Other than Rodman they don't have anyone that could hurt us down low. Small ball line up would do pretty well on those bulls. However if u thought lebron went off well Jordan would be you know Jordan.

What? No this is nonsense

Rodman's value wasn't on the offensive end. He would kill on defense and the boards. You go small.

Harper, Jordan, and Pippen in some combination guarding Curry, Thompson, and Iggy. Kukoc would be on Green, and Rodman is out rebounding and stopping any of the bigs the Warriors have to offer.

And Jordan is getting his no matter what you do, and in an efficient way.

Not only are you outmatched with a small ball lineup the Bulls are bigger than them across the board with their small ball lineup out there.

There is no real argument for the Warriors even getting to 6 games in this imo.

ChI_ShIzzLe
06-17-2015, 06:15 PM
I think the better thread topic would've been this Warriors team vs. Lebron, Wade & Bosh had Lebron stayed in Miami.

bgdreton
06-17-2015, 06:34 PM
Based on the way the game is played now it would be difficult to guess. If I did have to guess I would say the Bulls in 7 only bc of Jordan. I actually think it would be good series. Other than Rodman they don't have anyone that could hurt us down low. Small ball line up would do pretty well on those bulls. However if u thought lebron went off well Jordan would be you know Jordan.

What? No this is nonsense

Rodman's value wasn't on the offensive end. He would kill on defense and the boards. You go small.

Harper, Jordan, and Pippen in some combination guarding Curry, Thompson, and Iggy. Kukoc would be on Green, and Rodman is out rebounding and stopping any of the bigs the Warriors have to offer.

And Jordan is getting his no matter what you do, and in an efficient way.

Not only are you outmatched with a small ball lineup the Bulls are bigger than them across the board with their small ball lineup out there.

There is no real argument for the Warriors even getting to 6 games in this imo.

I disagree I still think bulls ultimately win however the simple fact that you don't have to guard Rodman as hard as the others would make a big difference. He is a top rebounder all time for Sure but he is not getting 100 percent of the boards. 3 point shooting would be a problem as well. Tony while a very underrated player would get exposed on D. The numbers the warriors put up offensively and defensively this whole year from start to finish are truly a statement of how good they are.

bgdreton
06-17-2015, 06:35 PM
I think the better thread topic would've been this Warriors team vs. Lebron, Wade & Bosh had Lebron stayed in Miami.

I agree!

xnick5757
06-17-2015, 07:04 PM
I think the better thread topic would've been this Warriors team vs. Lebron, Wade & Bosh had Lebron stayed in Miami.

Dubs in 4 obviously.

No Bosh, no dragic

Hawkeye15
06-17-2015, 07:51 PM
The Warriors struggled early, only eventually to beat a team with one top 10 player ever on the wrong side of his prime and his cast of teammates that is the worst cast I have ever seen for a finals player, the Bulls would destroy them.

Now, if the Warriors stay together, I think even if they don't get to 67 wins again, they might be even better come playoffs if they are healthy again next year.

hidalgo
06-17-2015, 09:28 PM
96 Bulls sweep

in fact, all the Bulls championship teams would beat this warriors team easily. even the 89, 90, & 95 Bulls that didn't win the championship would beat them. 1988 Bulls vs 2015 warriors could go either way. 1994 Bulls vs 2015 warriors would be interesting too

1986 Bulls vs 2015 warriors would be really interesting too. MJ dropped 49 & 63 pts on the Celtics, 43 ppg. i think he'd avg closer to 50 ppg 55%FG on this warriors team. that could go 7 as well just by MJ dominating

Hawkeye15
06-18-2015, 12:01 AM
96 Bulls sweep

in fact, all the Bulls championship teams would beat this warriors team easily. even the 89, 90, & 95 Bulls that didn't win the championship would beat them. 1988 Bulls vs 2015 warriors could go either way. 1994 Bulls vs 2015 warriors would be interesting too

1986 Bulls vs 2015 warriors would be really interesting too. MJ dropped 49 & 63 pts on the Celtics, 43 ppg. i think he'd avg closer to 50 ppg 55%FG on this warriors team. that could go 7 as well just by MJ dominating

is this post serious?

Sadds The Gr8
06-18-2015, 12:03 AM
is this post serious?

I lol'd at 50 ppg on 55%

mavwar53
06-18-2015, 12:33 AM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-best-nba-teams-of-all-time-according-to-elo/

Interesting

More-Than-Most
06-18-2015, 12:45 AM
the bulls in 5... they were beyond loaded

GREATNESS ONE
06-18-2015, 01:20 AM
Caw Caw!!! Fly like a Seagull!

lol, please
06-18-2015, 02:08 AM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-best-nba-teams-of-all-time-according-to-elo/

Interesting
Haters will ignore the empirical facts. When certain statistics don't fit their agenda they don't exist.

hidalgo
06-18-2015, 02:32 AM
is this post serious?dead serious. this warriors team is good, but absolutely beatable. they struggled with a 1 man team, & avoided SA, & LA. i think any Bulls team with Scottie could beat them, except maybe 1994, but that could go 7 games

and if MJ put 43 ppg on the 1986 Celtics defense, i think he could definitely get close to 50 ppg on the warriors. he's also had a few 45 ppg playoff series, & that was with handchecking. he'd scorch teams even worse now, especially if he had to because of so many injured players out like LeBron did

i don't see how this isn't extremely plausible to everyone. this is Michael Jordan we're talking about here. GOAT

quade36
06-18-2015, 07:17 AM
If you actually factor in the fact that players are bigger False and more athletic today than they were 20 years ago and are also better shooters and more skilled... False then this argument is actually a valid one. Based on that, I might even be inclined to go with the Warriors, but IDK. We'll never know the true impact of teams from different eras squaring off.



Just wanted to correct you.

If you just said more athletic I'd maybe agree if it weren't the Bulls. Jordan and Pippen would clearly hold their own athletically against any player today, yes even Lebron. Players then were bigger/stronger/better shooters and actually had defenses smother them which isn't allowed in today's game.

matt800
06-18-2015, 09:31 AM
Warriors were one of the better regular season teams ever, and were the best playoff team this year. But of all the championship teams since 1996, I don't see any team they are clearly better than.

Wrigheyes4MVP
06-18-2015, 11:28 AM
Just wanted to correct you.

If you just said more athletic I'd maybe agree if it weren't the Bulls. Jordan and Pippen would clearly hold their own athletically against any player today, yes even Lebron. Players then were bigger/stronger/better shooters and actually had defenses smother them which isn't allowed in today's game.

Players are definitely more skilled now. Saying otherwise is a huge misconception. Modern players are better shooters, better ball handlers, etc. A lot of people claim otherwise for reasons I'm not so sure, but to me its pretty obvious the the skill level has improved. It does in every sport. Athletes improve from decade to decade. Skill improves as well.

If you watch a game from the 90's and then right after that watch a game from today, you will see just how noticeable it is.

Players then were not bigger/stronger/better shooters. Quite the opposite actually. I don't know if its some sort of weird and biased nostalgic thing, but so many people share your point of view and you are dead wrong. The rule changes explain certain differences in the game (making the athletes seem softer). But no, they weren't bigger/stronger/better shooters back then. Not a chance in hell.

Wrigheyes4MVP
06-18-2015, 11:32 AM
This year's Dubs or last year's Spurs.

Now that one could go either way.

IBleedPurple
06-18-2015, 11:34 AM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-best-nba-teams-of-all-time-according-to-elo/

Interesting
Haters will ignore the empirical facts. When certain statistics don't fit their agenda they don't exist.Very basic calculation. They won what, 5 or 6 more games than the Nash led Suns did 2x. And the West was weaker this year than 10 years ago. Great team, yes. All-time great? Not so sure.

papipapsmanny
06-18-2015, 12:41 PM
Players are definitely more skilled now. Saying otherwise is a huge misconception. Modern players are better shooters, better ball handlers, etc. A lot of people claim otherwise for reasons I'm not so sure, but to me its pretty obvious the the skill level has improved. It does in every sport. Athletes improve from decade to decade. Skill improves as well.

If you watch a game from the 90's and then right after that watch a game from today, you will see just how noticeable it is.

Players then were not bigger/stronger/better shooters. Quite the opposite actually. I don't know if its some sort of weird and biased nostalgic thing, but so many people share your point of view and you are dead wrong. The rule changes explain certain differences in the game (making the athletes seem softer). But no, they weren't bigger/stronger/better shooters back then. Not a chance in hell.

What would be your explanation for this though.

Bigger and Stronger, if they are it is marginally. You act like evolution sped up over the last 20 years. Stronger perhaps marginally, with better equipment and knowledge of how to get bigger.

Better shooters... exactly how do you measure this? Its shooting a basketball there is no development over time with this... it is just practicing shooting a basketball. Don't see it.

More skilled? Perhaps again would really just have to do with practice time, and nothing to do with what decade it is.

Only real thing of over decades you can say was worse or better is level of competition in terms of how many teams are in the league and who wasn't allowed to play at certain times.

kovacs22
06-18-2015, 01:41 PM
Steve Kerr would have to coach against himself.

I prefer the player Kerr over Coach Kerr!

And, there will be a shoot-out between Kerr and Curry (though the latter is probably the better of the two), but MJ + Pippen more than make up for the difference. Then throw in Rodman... game over.

lol, please
06-18-2015, 02:51 PM
Rodman is one of the best rebounder and defenders in history, but Green would give him fits on both ends of the floor. Would love to hear why anyone would think otherwise.

sportsfanatic99
06-18-2015, 03:01 PM
Rodman is one of the best rebounder and defenders in history, but Green would give him fits on both ends of the floor. Would love to hear why anyone would think otherwise.

lol more like minor inconveniences at best

effen5
06-18-2015, 05:19 PM
Players are definitely more skilled now. Saying otherwise is a huge misconception. Modern players are better shooters, better ball handlers, etc. A lot of people claim otherwise for reasons I'm not so sure, but to me its pretty obvious the the skill level has improved. It does in every sport. Athletes improve from decade to decade. Skill improves as well.

If you watch a game from the 90's and then right after that watch a game from today, you will see just how noticeable it is.

Players then were not bigger/stronger/better shooters. Quite the opposite actually. I don't know if its some sort of weird and biased nostalgic thing, but so many people share your point of view and you are dead wrong. The rule changes explain certain differences in the game (making the athletes seem softer). But no, they weren't bigger/stronger/better shooters back then. Not a chance in hell.
I completely disagree. While players maybe stronger and faster...players now are so fundamentally flawed.
I'll just give one example...I have never seen so many pro players that can't make a damn free throw in my life.

tredigs
06-18-2015, 05:36 PM
I completely disagree. While players maybe stronger and faster...players now are so fundamentally flawed.
I'll just give one example...I have never seen so many pro players that can't make a damn free throw in my life.

FT shooting is the same by the league as a whole now as it was 60 years ago. Still ~75%.

effen5
06-18-2015, 05:37 PM
FT shooting is the same by the league as a whole now as it was 60 years ago. Still ~75%.
Ok I'll give another example...the fundamentals of centers have diminished in the last decade in a half.

Chronz
06-18-2015, 05:43 PM
NVM, tredigs addressed it

papipapsmanny
06-18-2015, 07:12 PM
Rodman is one of the best rebounder and defenders in history, but Green would give him fits on both ends of the floor. Would love to hear why anyone would think otherwise.

Oh because like yous said Rodman is one of the best defenders and rebounders in history, and Green is a marginal starter at best.

Rodman man didn't score much anyways but he would eat up green every other way

InRoseWeTrust
06-18-2015, 07:14 PM
Rodman is one of the best rebounder and defenders in history, but Green would give him fits on both ends of the floor. Would love to hear why anyone would think otherwise.

Give him fits in what aspect of the game? By preventing Rodman from scoring? I'm confused as to the point here.

Steelersfan84
06-18-2015, 11:19 PM
Which era we playing in?

90s- Bulls in 5

2010s- Bulls in 6

lol, please
06-19-2015, 12:45 AM
Which era we playing in?

90s- Bulls in 5

2010s- Bulls in 6
Just because Jordan is head and shoulders above lebron doesn't mean it's a guarantee. Rodman would get out hustled by Green, and Klay would lock Pippen down like an inmate.

Raps18-19 Champ
06-19-2015, 12:49 AM
I don't know what you saw, but the Warriors had a HORRIBLE Finals.

Thompson wasn't that good all series long.
Curry was bad in games 1, 2, and most of 3. And merely good (not great) in games 4, 5, and 6.
Iguodala was the mvp, and he was simply going around getting around 15 points and missing free throws all over the place.

That said, The Warriors of the season and playoffs were damn good. But the Warriors that played in the finals...sheesh.

I agree. The Warriors should have destroyed that ****** Cavs supporting cast in 4 games. They let Lebron dominate them to stretch it out to 6 games, with a lot them being close games.

Raps18-19 Champ
06-19-2015, 12:52 AM
Just because Jordan is head and shoulders above lebron doesn't mean it's a guarantee. Rodman would get out hustled by Green, and Klay would lock Pippen down like an inmate.

He couldn't even out hustle TT in half the games.

IBleedPurple
06-19-2015, 01:02 AM
Rodman is one of the best rebounder and defenders in history, but Green would give him fits on both ends of the floor. Would love to hear why anyone would think otherwise.Would he take away Rodman's coke or booze? Otherwize, minimal effect at best. Rodman giving Green fits, now that is completely true. Hype vs an all-time great. Your ears may be ringing, but you are losing reality.

THE MTL
06-19-2015, 01:06 AM
If the 14-15 Cavs were healthy they would have won in 4 games. And you over here talking about 96 Bulls lol

joedaheights
06-19-2015, 07:30 AM
96 bulls? 5, maybe 6.

91 bulls when pippen and Jordan were still as young as curry? Sweep with crushing totals in at least two games. Curry, Thompson and green don't breath with Michael, scottie and Horace on them

InRoseWeTrust
06-19-2015, 10:35 AM
"Rodman would get out hustled by Green, and Klay would lock Pippen down like an inmate."

I'm not sure which part is funnier.

lol, please
06-19-2015, 05:17 PM
"Rodman would get out hustled by Green, and Klay would lock Pippen down like an inmate."

I'm not sure which part is funnier.

Not sure what's so funny, it's true. I think you are underestimating how good this Warriors team is.

InRoseWeTrust
06-22-2015, 07:37 PM
Not sure what's so funny, it's true. I think you are underestimating how good this Warriors team is.

(1) Rodman is not getting 'outhustled' by Draymond Green. Rodman is one of the craziest, lankiest, dirtiest, energetic, wormish players the league has ever seen. Just stop.

(2) No, Klay is not 'locking Pippen down like an inmate.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html

Scottie was an extremely talented player on both ends of the floor who is basically a lock for top 50 of all time. I get that you're excited GSW has won the championship, as you should be. You guys had a great season, and I've repeatedly said hats off to GSW. That being said, I'm not underestimating them. It's just reality.

joedaheights
06-23-2015, 07:21 AM
(1) Rodman is not getting 'outhustled' by Draymond Green. Rodman is one of the craziest, lankiest, dirtiest, energetic, wormish players the league has ever seen. Just stop.

(2) No, Klay is not 'locking Pippen down like an inmate.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html

Scottie was an extremely talented player on both ends of the floor who is basically a lock for top 50 of all time. I get that you're excited GSW has won the championship, as you should be. You guys had a great season, and I've repeatedly said hats off to GSW. That being said, I'm not underestimating them. It's just reality.

The league hasn't seen a freak who could play like scottie pippen since. He was really almost Bo Jackson like. Even Bulls fans think "well, Jimmy a Butler is 6'7" and athletic, so..."

Pippen was actually closer to 6'9" but liked the reverse psych of listing himself at 6'7". He had the speed and agility of a player who was 6'0" and could jump out if the gym. Oh and his wingspan was 7'5"... It didn't really matter how tall you were or where your release point was ... Pippen would get a finger tip on your shot when you thought you had space.

The only 5 swing man defenders in his league ever are:

Lebron James
Michael Jordan
Michael cooper
Ron artest
Dennis rodman

Klay Thompson locking him down is comical ... Especially since, at the SF position the only passers in his league or better in my life are James and Bird.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-23-2015, 09:15 AM
I find it interesting that some people said GS in 6 games. GS just beat the Cavs in 6 games. Does that mean they equate the injured Cavs team in the 2015 finals with what is considered one of the best teams of all time?

mjt20mik
06-23-2015, 09:29 AM
Not sure what's so funny, it's true. I think you are underestimating how good this Warriors team is.

GSW couldn't keep Thompson off the glass. They aren't keeping Rodman from running free. While GSW team defense is good, there is no one on that team that could guard MJ or Scottie. That being said, MJ and Scottie could D up Steph Curry and Klay Thompson pretty effectively.

I don't see how GSW could win 1 game let alone the series. Bulls would sweep with ease.

Bigdaddyburch
06-23-2015, 10:37 AM
"Rodman would get out hustled by Green, and Klay would lock Pippen down like an inmate."

I'm not sure which part is funnier.


Yeah both equally insane.

Bigdaddyburch
06-23-2015, 10:39 AM
"Rodman would get out hustled by Green, and Klay would lock Pippen down like an inmate."

I'm not sure which part is funnier.

Not sure what's so funny, it's true. I think you are underestimating how good this Warriors team is.

You cant honestly believe that? If you do then ypu could not have seen them or you are so short memoried you have forgotten how great these guys were.

IBleedPurple
06-23-2015, 10:57 AM
"Rodman would get out hustled by Green, and Klay would lock Pippen down like an inmate."

I'm not sure which part is funnier.

Not sure what's so funny, it's true. I think you are underestimating how good this Warriors team is.I think you are in homer/ring mode. The dubs aren't even the best team of this century, much less an all-time great. They were very good in a weak West, and could've been down 0-3 to Lebron and a bunch of pine riders with one damn basket. Not even close to an all-time great team.

lol, please
06-24-2015, 02:38 PM
I think you are in homer/ring mode. The dubs aren't even the best team of this century, much less an all-time great. They were very good in a weak West, and could've been down 0-3 to Lebron and a bunch of pine riders with one damn basket. Not even close to an all-time great team.
You couldn't be more wrong I'm afraid. I guess 10.01 SRS teams just grow on trees where you are from.

IBleedPurple
06-24-2015, 02:43 PM
I think you are in homer/ring mode. The dubs aren't even the best team of this century, much less an all-time great. They were very good in a weak West, and could've been down 0-3 to Lebron and a bunch of pine riders with one damn basket. Not even close to an all-time great team.
You couldn't be more wrong I'm afraid. I guess 10.01 SRS teams just grow on trees where you are from.And again, ignore the playoffs. Regular seasons mean very little, Steve Nash and George Karl would agree.

effen5
06-24-2015, 08:05 PM
Rodman is one of the best rebounder and defenders in history, but Green would give him fits on both ends of the floor. Would love to hear why anyone would think otherwise.

No green wouldnt. Rodman would make green his little ***** and make green completely ineffective. To think otherwise is wrong or you've never seen Dennis Rodman play. He gave fits to some of the best players ever to play the game. Green was playing against Tristan...not even close to being on the same level as rodman.

kdspurman
06-24-2015, 08:26 PM
I find it interesting that some people said GS in 6 games. GS just beat the Cavs in 6 games. Does that mean they equate the injured Cavs team in the 2015 finals with what is considered one of the best teams of all time?

Seriously...

G_S_W
06-24-2015, 09:17 PM
So much weird in this thread. :eyebrow:

I picked Bulls in 5.

joedaheights
06-24-2015, 10:44 PM
No green wouldnt. Rodman would make green his little ***** and make green completely ineffective. To think otherwise is wrong or you've never seen Dennis Rodman play. He gave fits to some of the best players ever to play the game. Green was playing against Tristan...not even close to being on the same level as rodman.

91 Horace Grant would do even better

hidalgo
06-24-2015, 11:53 PM
the best team ever 1996 72 win Bulls vs a Warriors team who struggled badly with a 1 man Cavs team? 1996 Bulls sweep them. the warriors were really good, but they'll be lucky to be considered top 20 all time(19 or 20 i mean), VS the best team ever? lol stop it. no team could beat the unbeata-Bulls

DaBear
06-25-2015, 12:02 AM
This thread is still going? :laugh2:

GS was the best team this year, but c'mon they're definitely not an all time great..

lol, please
06-25-2015, 12:16 AM
This thread is still going? :laugh2:

GS was the best team this year, but c'mon they're definitely not an all time great..
Because you say so? They just finished one of the greatest seasons in history and took the title while not playing at their best.

tredigs
06-25-2015, 12:25 AM
They were 100% an All-Time Great reg season team. Top 10 all time in wins and top 5 in SRS. Managed to win the playoffs/ship with a record of 16-5. The two times they got challenged, they went on 3-0 sweeps and mauled the opposing team by an average of 15+ points. Wish their comp was up to par, hopefully next year.

That was a top 10 NBA season. Laughing this team off is very foolish. They'd smoke many, many championship teams from years past.

DaBear
06-25-2015, 12:27 AM
Because you say so? They just finished one of the greatest seasons in history and took the title while not playing at their best.

They weren't dominate in the playoffs. Sorry, but if they're really one of the best teams of all time, they shouldn't have struggled with an injury plagued Cavs team. I think the 2014 Spurs would beat the Warriors in 7.

tredigs
06-25-2015, 12:36 AM
They weren't dominate in the playoffs. Sorry, but if they're really one of the best teams of all time, they shouldn't have struggled with an injury plagued Cavs team. I think the 2014 Spurs would beat the Warriors in 7.

1 - The 2014 Spurs played the best basketball I've ever seen in an NBA Finals, and I've seen 1989 on.
2 - They'd probably win in 6 if they did in fact win (wouldn't surprise me). I don't see a team winning game 7 in Oracle (if they were close enough talent wise to be 3-3), which is where they'd have to play.

IBleedPurple
06-25-2015, 02:08 AM
Regular. Season. So they won a few more games than some of the Suns teams, albeit being much more efficient. Doesn't affect their playoff performances and a legitimate shot at losing to one player and 7 other bodies that played. I'd say from year to year, there are at least 15-20 championship teams that stomp them. All-time great regular season, sure. All-time great team, no.

G_S_W
06-25-2015, 02:47 AM
As I said before in another thread, comparing this Warriors team with the all time great teams is premature at best, and flat-out blind homerism at worst.

Jordan's Bulls have 6 chips, Magic's Lakers have 5, Bird's C's have 3, Russell C's had 11, Duncan's Spurs have 5, etc.

Let's just enjoy this chip, the Warriors' first in 40 years, and enjoy the upcoming halcyon days for what may be emerging as the best franchise in the NBA overall. I still think Pop and Duncan's spurs have been the best organization in the past 10-12 years, but the Warriors' franchise may have already caught up in terms of quality of ownership and the front office.

Obviously, the Warriors lack the experience and polish of the veteran Spurs but are far younger and are going to be a dominant force for at least the next five seasons, bare minimum.

tredigs
06-25-2015, 08:50 AM
Regular. Season. So they won a few more games than some of the Suns teams, albeit being much more efficient. Doesn't affect their playoff performances and a legitimate shot at losing to one player and 7 other bodies that played. I'd say from year to year, there are at least 15-20 championship teams that stomp them. All-time great regular season, sure. All-time great team, no.
And. Won. The. Title. 16. 5. Record.


I wasn't impressed either. But, maybe their lack of competition had a part in their lack of effort. Who knows. Hopefully they get a chance to showcase their full arsenal next season.

effen5
06-25-2015, 11:28 AM
The bulls were 87 and 13 95-96

I don't see that ever being broken.

joedaheights
06-25-2015, 01:45 PM
The bulls were 87 and 13 95-96

I don't see that ever being broken.

They weren't even the best bulls team. In 91 they hit a stride by the halfway point of the regular season where they were unstoppable.

But in 91 the league still had magic, a pistons team that was not yet falling apart, prime Hakeem, prime Ewing ... Much better league

valade16
06-25-2015, 01:53 PM
The 2 guys who did the most against the Warriors in that series were Bron and Tristan Thompson and the 96 Bulls have better versions of those players in MJ and Rodman, so that's already not a good sign for GS.

Then there's the fact that GS didn't double Bron because Cleveland had not reliable second option, something the Bulls do have in Pippen, and I just don't see it.

G_S_W
06-25-2015, 02:32 PM
The 2 guys who did the most against the Warriors in that series were Bron and Tristan Thompson and the 96 Bulls have better versions of those players in MJ and Rodman, so that's already not a good sign for GS.

Then there's the fact that GS didn't double Bron because Cleveland had not reliable second option, something the Bulls do have in Pippen, and I just don't see it.

This is about as diplomatic a response as OP is likely to get.

IBleedPurple
06-25-2015, 03:03 PM
And. Won. The. Title. 16. 5. Record.


I wasn't impressed either. But, maybe their lack of competition had a part in their lack of effort. Who knows. Hopefully they get a chance to showcase their full arsenal next season.A very valid point, and the Warriors are downright scary going forward. Just when Duncan gets old and the Lakers stink, we have a new powerhouse in the west. Dammit.

effen5
06-25-2015, 08:25 PM
They weren't even the best bulls team. In 91 they hit a stride by the halfway point of the regular season where they were unstoppable.

But in 91 the league still had magic, a pistons team that was not yet falling apart, prime Hakeem, prime Ewing ... Much better league

How scary is that. Those bulls teams were downright scary.

Verbal Christ
06-25-2015, 09:15 PM
"Show their full arsenal" ?? They were the healthiest team ever. I want to see them fight adversity before even mentioning them amongst the greats. Hopefully next year they face some healthy competition, but hey better to be lucky than good.

Congrats again on the title dubs fans, nice to see y'all win with class! Lmao.

lol, please
06-28-2015, 01:17 AM
"Show their full arsenal" ?? They were the healthiest team ever. I want to see them fight adversity before even mentioning them amongst the greats. Hopefully next year they face some healthy competition, but hey better to be lucky than good.

Congrats again on the title dubs fans, nice to see y'all win with class! Lmao.
Healthy during the playoffs yes, but I think he means full arsenal as in they didn't play at their best, they are capable of so much more

Munkeysuit
06-28-2015, 02:27 AM
Bulls in 5, I got Warriors 1 win in a "wtf?" kinda "take em by surprise" kinda "where'd these guys come from" kinda "someone poisoned the Gatorade" kinda game.

IKnowHoops
06-28-2015, 03:11 AM
Bulls will curb stomp GS. Common now.

IKnowHoops
06-28-2015, 03:20 AM
And GS is an All-Time team. There were amazing. And they were doing things Ive never seen done.

JAZZNC
06-28-2015, 01:53 PM
I can't believe this is even a question.

Hell I think the 97-98 Jazz would give the Warriors fits (might not win). If Delevadova could give Curry so much trouble imagine what Stockton would have done to him. And Green (sooooo overrated) couldn't keep TT from double doubles every night, hell Malone would have had his way.

And people think the Warriors would beat the Bulls....don't know what to say that hasn't already been stated.

tredigs
06-28-2015, 03:26 PM
"Show their full arsenal" ?? They were the healthiest team ever. I want to see them fight adversity before even mentioning them amongst the greats. Hopefully next year they face some healthy competition, but hey better to be lucky than good.

Congrats again on the title dubs fans, nice to see y'all win with class! Lmao.

Nobody cares about you, your complete lack of BBIQ or your never-ending trolling posts. Go away.

lol, please
07-21-2015, 01:04 AM
I can't believe this is even a question.

Hell I think the 97-98 Jazz would give the Warriors fits (might not win). If Delevadova could give Curry so much trouble imagine what Stockton would have done to him. And Green (sooooo overrated) couldn't keep TT from double doubles every night, hell Malone would have had his way.

And people think the Warriors would beat the Bulls....don't know what to say that hasn't already been stated.
This warriors team is already considered a top 3 all time team. Its not as outlandish as you make it sound

Saddletramp
07-21-2015, 01:07 AM
Goddamnit I was hoping you were permabanned.

SPURSFAN1
07-21-2015, 01:07 AM
2014 Spurs GOAT team.

lol, please
07-21-2015, 01:17 AM
Goddamnit I was hoping you were permabanned.
Good luck with that lol. If you knew what it was even for it wasn't even infraction worthy. Way to stay on topic though.

lol, please
07-21-2015, 01:18 AM
2014 Spurs GOAT team.
A few Bulls, Celtics, and Warriors teams were better

Saddletramp
07-21-2015, 01:22 AM
Good luck with that lol. If you knew what it was even for it wasn't even infraction worthy. Way to stay on topic though.

You notice the thread's been dead for almost a month. Funny how when you disappear your trolling can't keep the thread active.

And now I shall quit my own hypocritical trolling.

lol, please
07-21-2015, 01:24 AM
You notice the thread's been dead for almost a month. Funny how when you disappear your trolling can't keep the thread active.

And now I shall quit my own hypocritical trolling.
Quit while you're ahead, that's the spirit [emoji23]

PowerHouse
07-21-2015, 01:25 AM
A few Bulls, Celtics, and Warriors teams were better

The '01 Lakers would beat any of those 3 (especially if you're talking about a 60's Celtics team)

SPURSFAN1
07-21-2015, 01:27 AM
A few Bulls, Celtics, and Warriors teams were better

None of those teams could stop our ball movement or 3 point shooting. Amazing defense and depth. Sorry 4-1 every team ever.

Sactown
07-21-2015, 01:30 AM
Quite a few teams would beat this years warriors almost including a depleted Cavs team this year

The warriors showed their lack of maturity when it mattered most, obviously I think they'll continue to progress , but Curry and Thompson nearly **** the bed

Early Lakers would win
2002 Kings would of beat them
90's bulls
Mid 80's Celts and Lakers
Bad boys
Mid 2000 Spurs

The warriors of this season lacked experience and hopefully their next run will be even better

mjk
07-21-2015, 11:38 AM
Bulls would be an AWFUL match up for the Warriors as they had the versatility to easily play small ball with the Warriors. While I doubt they'd sweep them, it wouldn't go more than 6 at most.

mrblisterdundee
07-22-2015, 10:37 AM
That depends; who's Steve Kerr playing for?

Nick O
07-22-2015, 04:44 PM
this is dumb. The warriors took 6 games to barely beat the worst team to ever play in the nba finals.

bulls in 5

Phantom Dreamer
07-22-2015, 11:35 PM
That depends; who's Steve Kerr playing for?Well, answer that question yourself, Kerr was a player on one team and a coach for the other.

nastynice
07-23-2015, 07:40 AM
def gotta go bulls, but somewhat unfair question as we gotta see how the dubs play the next couple of years. Part of why we know the bulls were so damn legit is cuz that season is sandwiched in between 2 other championships. If dubs can start creating a dynasty, all of a sudden looking back on it people will think maybe they just lagged and turned it up when they wanted to, rather than struggling by having to go 6 games.

nastynice
07-23-2015, 07:41 AM
2014 Spurs GOAT team.

lol, u just poppin up everywhere, huh

MonroeFAN
07-23-2015, 07:43 AM
I hate to sound like an deek here, but they nearly lost to one player. They're towards the bottom the worst championship teams I can think of.

lol, please
07-24-2015, 01:18 AM
I hate to sound like an deek here, but they nearly lost to one player. They're towards the bottom the worst championship teams I can think of.
How do you figure that? Ridiculous

Saddletramp
07-24-2015, 03:11 AM
How do you figure that? Ridiculous
Lol, please. To think otherwise is ridiculous.

nastynice
07-24-2015, 04:41 AM
I hate to sound like an deek here, but they nearly lost to one player. They're towards the bottom the worst championship teams I can think of.

I don't know about all that. "Nearly losing" implies that the other team had a legit shot to win. Twice the warriors went down 2-1 in a series after playing careless, and twice when the heat was on, they basically controlled the remaining (48x3=)150 minutes of each series. I wouldn't say "nearly lost" as much as I would say took a little wake up call to start caring. Seriously, at what points in games 4-6 of either series was there any doubt who was gonna win? Its like saying lakers "nearly lost" to AI during the '01 finals, lol, uhh, not so much!!

Only replying to the bold, rest of your post, that's fine, you can have any opinion of them you want.

MonroeFAN
07-24-2015, 11:06 AM
How do you figure that? Ridiculous

Dude, you're a joke, never reply to my comments again.

MonroeFAN
07-24-2015, 11:08 AM
I don't know about all that. "Nearly losing" implies that the other team had a legit shot to win. Twice the warriors went down 2-1 in a series after playing careless, and twice when the heat was on, they basically controlled the remaining (48x3=)150 minutes of each series. I wouldn't say "nearly lost" as much as I would say took a little wake up call to start caring. Seriously, at what points in games 4-6 of either series was there any doubt who was gonna win? Its like saying lakers "nearly lost" to AI during the '01 finals, lol, uhh, not so much!!

Only replying to the bold, rest of your post, that's fine, you can have any opinion of them you want.

The Lakers didn't "nearly lose" to AI though. AI snuck one game out and then got his *** kicked. I don't know the numbers, but I would bet that Cleveland held more leads per game than GS.

Regardless, they won, I'm not trying to take anything away from that, and it's fair for you to call me out. This is merely my opinion. Impressive team, but an off-year for a lot of powerhouse franchises and the league in general. It was fun though.

lol, please
07-24-2015, 11:12 AM
Dude, you're a joke, never reply to my comments again.
Compelling argument. The warriors actually beat a full team minus two injuries, and only two teams in history have better records. Interesting what facts can do to an argument, eh?

MonroeFAN
07-24-2015, 11:14 AM
Joke.

lol @ bringing up regular season records & the loss of 2 "starters" both of which are all-stars.

You and I are not doing this right now, get a hobby.

Scoots
07-24-2015, 11:15 AM
LONG time Warriors fan here, and I have no doubt the Bulls would win if they were playing with the '96 rules, and if they were playing with the 2015 rules the Bulls would probably win but it would be closer.

In 2015 rules it would take a couple games for the Bulls to not foul everybody out on hand checks :)

lol, please
07-24-2015, 02:27 PM
Joke.

lol @ bringing up regular season records & the loss of 2 "starters" both of which are all-stars.

You and I are not doing this right now, get a hobby.
Actually it's regular season and post season combined. And just because a player is an all star doesn't mean all all stars provide equal impact. Kyrie was a meaningful loss but don't pretend Love was.

LONG time Warriors fan here, and I have no doubt the Bulls would win if they were playing with the '96 rules, and if they were playing with the 2015 rules the Bulls would probably win but it would be closer.

In 2015 rules it would take a couple games for the Bulls to not foul everybody out on hand checks :)
Bulls would have no answer for Curry

Scoots
07-25-2015, 12:23 PM
Bulls would have no answer for Curry

Sure they would if they were using 96 rules they would just beat the crap out of him.

lol, please
07-25-2015, 01:40 PM
Sure they would if they were using 96 rules they would just beat the crap out of him.
I mean with today's rules.

And I really think the soft label is exxagerated with curry. He's a physical player

flea
07-25-2015, 01:49 PM
I mean with today's rules.

And I really think the soft label is exxagerated with curry. He's a physical player

Lol no he's not. MJ was more physical (nobody would disagree with that) but being physical was still how you slowed him down. That is even more true for Curry, who is even less physical weaker than someone like Tony Parker.

Leftcoast_yg
07-25-2015, 01:56 PM
Who wins between a tiger and a lion?

This is what these threads look like we would never know. It's based on your imagination and opinion and it gets derailed by insults to each team getting bashed, pointless.

Scoots
07-25-2015, 03:36 PM
I mean with today's rules.

And I really think the soft label is exxagerated with curry. He's a physical player

Curry is not soft, but the way to defend him is to be physical, and I have little doubt Jordan would hurt Steph's O more than Steph could hurt Jordan's.

lol, please
07-25-2015, 03:38 PM
Curry is not soft, but the way to defend him is to be physical, and I have little doubt Jordan would hurt Steph's O more than Steph could hurt Jordan's.
Well you can say that about anyone, can't you? I think Curry will score all over Jordan to be honest, but Jordan would get his every game as well, he is more versatile a scorer and has such high basketball iq.

DaBear
07-25-2015, 03:44 PM
Well you can say that about anyone, can't you? I think Curry will score all over Jordan to be honest, but Jordan would get his every game as well, he is more versatile a scorer and has such high basketball iq.

:laugh2:

DaBear
07-25-2015, 03:45 PM
I always come to this thread to get a good laugh.

ccugrad1
07-25-2015, 04:10 PM
Bulls easily. GS barely beat Cleveland with only LeBron.

Vee-Rex
07-25-2015, 04:48 PM
Well you can say that about anyone, can't you? I think Curry will score all over Jordan to be honest, but Jordan would get his every game as well, he is more versatile a scorer and has such high basketball iq.

Curry couldn't 'score all over' Matthew Dellavedova, so what makes you think he could do it to MJ? You don't think MJ would defend better than that?

Also Ron Harper was a good defender. He could do as well as Delly did.

That Bulls entire backcourt + SF was shutdown. I have no doubt that Harper could contain Curry (Delly did), Jordan contain Klay, and Pippen contain Iggy/Barnes.

And Rodman would molest Green in the paint on the rebounds.

And who's gonna stop MJ? No one on the Dubs could contain him, no one.

I get it, dudes still flying cause the Dubs won a ship. But the Bulls match up extremely well and anyone suggesting that Curry would be on the same level as MJ in terms of finals performance need to be slapped.

IBleedPurple
07-25-2015, 05:13 PM
I always come to this thread to get a good laugh.Same. Some of these posts had to be typed while smiling at the ridiculousness.

smith&wesson
07-25-2015, 05:26 PM
Two of the greatest teams of all time. Who wins?

this GSW team won 1 finals vs a hobbled squad.. how do you compare them to a dynasty ? smh

sep11ie
07-25-2015, 05:33 PM
Bulls in 1 and a half.

cmellofan15
07-25-2015, 06:57 PM
Bulls in 1 and a half.

but....but...Curry would score all over MJ.

lol, please
07-25-2015, 07:10 PM
but....but...Curry would score all over MJ.
Glad we can single out less than a full sentence of a post and ignore the rest. :rolleyes:

It's a testament to his scoring ability not a knock on Jordan or anyone defensively. When curry has bad nights it's on him 9/10 not the defender (s). Someone will mention Delly of course, and again, the exception not the rule. If you honestly think that because Delly played great defense on him in one series, all of the sudden any player better than Delly will shut him down, that's nonsensical and a baseless conclusion.

alexander_37
07-25-2015, 07:20 PM
Bulls in 6 possibly but doubtfully 5.

Scoots
07-25-2015, 07:31 PM
this GSW team won 1 finals vs a hobbled squad.. how do you compare them to a dynasty ? smh

To be fair he was comparing them to a single season for the Bulls, not to the dynasty.

BKLYNpigeon
07-25-2015, 07:57 PM
what a F-ing stupid thread....

goingfor28
07-26-2015, 01:43 AM
Zero need to bump this stupid thread. Nobody had posted in a month and the Bulls would sweep.

Closed

basch152
07-26-2015, 03:08 AM
Curry couldn't 'score all over' Matthew Dellavedova, so what makes you think he could do it to MJ? You don't think MJ would defend better than that?

Also Ron Harper was a good defender. He could do as well as Delly did.

That Bulls entire backcourt + SF was shutdown. I have no doubt that Harper could contain Curry (Delly did), Jordan contain Klay, and Pippen contain Iggy/Barnes.

And Rodman would molest Green in the paint on the rebounds.

And who's gonna stop MJ? No one on the Dubs could contain him, no one.

I get it, dudes still flying cause the Dubs won a ship. But the Bulls match up extremely well and anyone suggesting that Curry would be on the same level as MJ in terms of finals performance need to be slapped.

Wait, what? How did delly shut curry down? I seem to recall curry missing a lot of did open shots and shots he normally hits. Delly had nothing to do with it.

Hawkeye15
07-26-2015, 03:48 AM
GS would win a game, but would be killed. Rookie finals team, as good as they are, against a seasoned Bulls team with the GOAT? GS lost 2 games to a team with D leaguers, and LeBron.

Scoots
07-26-2015, 12:03 PM
Two of the greatest teams of all time. Who wins?http://healthlifeok.com/green/images/96.gif http://healthlifeok.com/green/images/45.gif

The fans!

Scoots
07-26-2015, 12:06 PM
GS would win a game, but would be killed. Rookie finals team, as good as they are, against a seasoned Bulls team with the GOAT? GS lost 2 games to a team with D leaguers, and LeBron.

That is such a tired story line ... if they were so bad why did are the Cavs looking to keep the "D leaguers" around? It was more that the Warriors D was good enough to slow the other Cavs on the floor just like the "D Leaguers" were good enough on D to slow the Warriors offense down.

Scoots
07-26-2015, 12:07 PM
Wait, what? How did delly shut curry down? I seem to recall curry missing a lot of did open shots and shots he normally hits. Delly had nothing to do with it.

Delly didn't "shut Curry down" ... but Curry's open misses did have something to do with the defense on him. He was rushing and off balance because of the D even when he was wide open.

IBleedPurple
07-26-2015, 12:43 PM
This warriors team is already considered a top 3 all time team. Its not as outlandish as you make it soundProve it.

TheNumber37
07-26-2015, 01:13 PM
the greatest team of all time vs maybe the 10th best

lol, please
07-27-2015, 12:30 PM
Wait, what? How did delly shut curry down? I seem to recall curry missing a lot of did open shots and shots he normally hits. Delly had nothing to do with it.
This.

Vee-Rex
07-27-2015, 02:22 PM
Delly didn't "shut Curry down" ... but Curry's open misses did have something to do with the defense on him. He was rushing and off balance because of the D even when he was wide open.

TY.

No one shut Curry down, but Delly played good enough defense to contribute to Curry's missing shots.

If Delly can do it, why can't Harper/Jordan?

Teams step up their defensive intensity in the playoffs. You (general, not you Scoots) can't expect for Curry to just score all over really good defenders in the playoffs. I don't think the Pels had anyone to guard him, and neither did the Rockets. But the Grizzlies did, and so did the Cavs.

So I'll reiterate - NO ONE is gonna stop Curry. He's too insane offensively. But top notch defenders can try to contain him, and Delly happened to do that in the finals. There's no reason to think MJ or Harper couldn't do it either.

Cal827
07-27-2015, 02:35 PM
It's so hard to tell nowadays with how the sport has changed. The 2014-2015 Lakers might've been able to take the 95-96 Bulls, but we will never know.

flea
07-27-2015, 05:02 PM
It's so hard to tell nowadays with how the sport has changed. The 2014-2015 Lakers might've been able to take the 95-96 Bulls, but we will never know.

You must be high.

Jamiecballer
07-27-2015, 05:04 PM
Bulls for sure. Although Warriors might steal one.

Scoots
07-27-2015, 06:25 PM
TY.

No one shut Curry down, but Delly played good enough defense to contribute to Curry's missing shots.

If Delly can do it, why can't Harper/Jordan?

Teams step up their defensive intensity in the playoffs. You (general, not you Scoots) can't expect for Curry to just score all over really good defenders in the playoffs. I don't think the Pels had anyone to guard him, and neither did the Rockets. But the Grizzlies did, and so did the Cavs.

So I'll reiterate - NO ONE is gonna stop Curry. He's too insane offensively. But top notch defenders can try to contain him, and Delly happened to do that in the finals. There's no reason to think MJ or Harper couldn't do it either.

Possibly the biggest defensive asset the Cavs had in slowing Curry down was the fact that LeBron was just choking the life out of the Warriors offense by slowing down and minimizing turnovers and fast breaks. That was the most impressive thing to me in the NBA finals ... LeBron not only could dominate the ball at an unprecedented level, but absolutely refused to budge from that plan, and that fact more than any other is why the series went 6 games and why the Warriors offense couldn't get going (the Warriors lead the NBA in fast break points and transition 3s and LeBron took all that away by himself for the most part). That said, there are no other players in the NBA and possibly none since Jordan who would have the ability and the mental fortitude to do what LeBron did ... and I'm not sure Jordan could pull it off.

p.s. LeBron's dominance of the ball on offense wreaking such havoc with the Warriors is one of the reasons I'm not so sure the series might have been more lopsided had Irving and Love been available and LeBron became just another cog on the offense rather than embody the offense himself.

lol, please
07-31-2015, 02:06 PM
Possibly the biggest defensive asset the Cavs had in slowing Curry down was the fact that LeBron was just choking the life out of the Warriors offense by slowing down and minimizing turnovers and fast breaks. That was the most impressive thing to me in the NBA finals ... LeBron not only could dominate the ball at an unprecedented level, but absolutely refused to budge from that plan, and that fact more than any other is why the series went 6 games and why the Warriors offense couldn't get going (the Warriors lead the NBA in fast break points and transition 3s and LeBron took all that away by himself for the most part). That said, there are no other players in the NBA and possibly none since Jordan who would have the ability and the mental fortitude to do what LeBron did ... and I'm not sure Jordan could pull it off.

p.s. LeBron's dominance of the ball on offense wreaking such havoc with the Warriors is one of the reasons I'm not so sure the series might have been more lopsided had Irving and Love been available and LeBron became just another cog on the offense rather than embody the offense himself.
He had a great series, but I think you are forgetting that Curry and Klay performed really poorly on their own, if they produce as expected the series probably doesn't go 5.

valade16
07-31-2015, 03:02 PM
He had a great series, but I think you are forgetting that Curry and Klay performed really poorly on their own, if they produce as expected the series probably doesn't go 5.

But how is this an argument for the Warriors? So instead of needing a great defensive performance to stop Curry and Klay the Bulls can just wait for Curry and Klay to play poorly for a portion of the series...

lol, please
07-31-2015, 05:45 PM
But how is this an argument for the Warriors? So instead of needing a great defensive performance to stop Curry and Klay the Bulls can just wait for Curry and Klay to play poorly for a portion of the series...
It's an argument for the warriors because they underperformed and still won, you can't expect Klay and curry to lay an egg 9/10 times.

Saddletramp
07-31-2015, 08:06 PM
It's an argument for the warriors because they underperformed and still won, you can't expect Klay and curry to lay an egg 9/10 times.

You just don't get it. If Klay/Curry underperformed against that crippled Cavs team, what do you think they'd do against Pippen and the ****ing GOAT? If those two guys laid an egg, they'd be toast. And it would take monster games from them to beat Michael Jordan and even if LeBron and Jordan were on the same level, the rest of that Bulls team and Phil are >>>>than that Cavs team and Blatt.



Come on. You're either trolling or you're out of your league or you're both.

lol, please
08-01-2015, 02:20 AM
You just don't get it. If Klay/Curry underperformed against that crippled Cavs team, what do you think they'd do against Pippen and the ****ing GOAT? If those two guys laid an egg, they'd be toast. And it would take monster games from them to beat Michael Jordan and even if LeBron and Jordan were on the same level, the rest of that Bulls team and Phil are >>>>than that Cavs team and Blatt.



Come on. You're either trolling or you're out of your league or you're both.
That would hold true if the reason they underperformed was mainly because of the Cavaliers defense, but they underperformed on their own.

Saddletramp
08-01-2015, 03:12 AM
Whatever you say, bro

Vee-Rex
08-01-2015, 10:00 AM
That would hold true if the reason they underperformed was mainly because of the Cavaliers defense, but they underperformed on their own.

Let's look at Stephen Curry

You say he underperformed on the Cavs? Stephen Curry played very, very similarly against the Grizzlies.

vs. Cavs: 26ppg 44% FG 38% 3pt 6 apg 4.7 turnovers
vs. Grizz: 24ppg 42% FG 40% 3pt 6.5 apg 4.0 turnovers

now let's look at the Rox/Pels

vs. Rox: 31.2ppg 51% FG 50% 3pt 6 apg 2.8 turnovers
vs. Pels: 33.8ppg 45% FG 41% 3pt 7 apg 4.0 turnovers

He played in 4 playoff series and 2 of 'em he didn't play well, so who's to say that he didn't overperform against the Rockets/Pelicans? Maybe his Cavs/Grizz numbers were his usual 'playoff self' and he just got lucky against the Rox/Pels? Afterall, Steph Curry's career playoff numbers prior to this year are extremely similar to his numbers against the Cavs/Grizz (23ppg 43% FG 39% 3pt). Statistics suggest an overperformance against the Rox/Pels rather than an underperformance. So that's it, right?

Wrong. I'm not gonna strip away credit from Steph by saying he overperformed vs. Rox/Pels, even though the statistics suggest that. Steph didn't overperform against the Rockets/Pels, just as he didn't underperform against the Cavs/Grizz. He just played against some tough defense vs. the Cavs and Grizz. Trying to say that he was 'just off' and 'just had a bad series' against the Cavs speaks volumes of your stupidity and homerism.

Vee-Rex
08-01-2015, 10:06 AM
Possibly the biggest defensive asset the Cavs had in slowing Curry down was the fact that LeBron was just choking the life out of the Warriors offense by slowing down and minimizing turnovers and fast breaks. That was the most impressive thing to me in the NBA finals ... LeBron not only could dominate the ball at an unprecedented level, but absolutely refused to budge from that plan, and that fact more than any other is why the series went 6 games and why the Warriors offense couldn't get going (the Warriors lead the NBA in fast break points and transition 3s and LeBron took all that away by himself for the most part). That said, there are no other players in the NBA and possibly none since Jordan who would have the ability and the mental fortitude to do what LeBron did ... and I'm not sure Jordan could pull it off.

p.s. LeBron's dominance of the ball on offense wreaking such havoc with the Warriors is one of the reasons I'm not so sure the series might have been more lopsided had Irving and Love been available and LeBron became just another cog on the offense rather than embody the offense himself.

This too. Lebron slowed it down so much. Cavs wanted it to be a slow paced game with a bigger lineup. Trying to run with the Warriors with Delly/Shumpert/JR/TT and no Love/Irving would've gotten them swept. Despite going up 2-1, Cavs were the ones playing 'afraid' if that makes any sense.

Saddletramp
08-01-2015, 02:19 PM
Let's look at Stephen Curry

You say he underperformed on the Cavs? Stephen Curry played very, very similarly against the Grizzlies.

vs. Cavs: 26ppg 44% FG 38% 3pt 6 apg 4.7 turnovers
vs. Grizz: 24ppg 42% FG 40% 3pt 6.5 apg 4.0 turnovers

now let's look at the Rox/Pels

vs. Rox: 31.2ppg 51% FG 50% 3pt 6 apg 2.8 turnovers
vs. Pels: 33.8ppg 45% FG 41% 3pt 7 apg 4.0 turnovers

He played in 4 playoff series and 2 of 'em he didn't play well, so who's to say that he didn't overperform against the Rockets/Pelicans? Maybe his Cavs/Grizz numbers were his usual 'playoff self' and he just got lucky against the Rox/Pels? Afterall, Steph Curry's career playoff numbers prior to this year are extremely similar to his numbers against the Cavs/Grizz (23ppg 43% FG 39% 3pt). Statistics suggest an overperformance against the Rox/Pels rather than an underperformance. So that's it, right?

Wrong. I'm not gonna strip away credit from Steph by saying he overperformed vs. Rox/Pels, even though the statistics suggest that. Steph didn't overperform against the Rockets/Pels, just as he didn't underperform against the Cavs/Grizz. He just played against some tough defense vs. the Cavs and Grizz. Trying to say that he was 'just off' and 'just had a bad series' against the Cavs speaks volumes of your stupidity and homerism.

He's got apartmentism. He's just renting until the Lakers get good again.

Scoots
08-02-2015, 06:44 PM
This too. Lebron slowed it down so much. Cavs wanted it to be a slow paced game with a bigger lineup. Trying to run with the Warriors with Delly/Shumpert/JR/TT and no Love/Irving would've gotten them swept. Despite going up 2-1, Cavs were the ones playing 'afraid' if that makes any sense.

Yep. That part of LeBron's performance was the most amazing to me and the least reported. Unlike most people though, I'm not sure the finals would have been as close with Love and Kyrie playing and the Cavs trying to run with the Warriors, that finals would have been WILDLY different ... People seem to think adding Kyrie and Love would only improve the Cavs offense with no other repercussions. I don't know who came up with the Hey LeBron offense for the finals but it was a genius move that would only work with a bball genius like LeBron and a bunch of hard nosed defenders.

Vee-Rex
08-03-2015, 11:54 AM
Yep. That part of LeBron's performance was the most amazing to me and the least reported. Unlike most people though, I'm not sure the finals would have been as close with Love and Kyrie playing and the Cavs trying to run with the Warriors, that finals would have been WILDLY different ... People seem to think adding Kyrie and Love would only improve the Cavs offense with no other repercussions. I don't know who came up with the Hey LeBron offense for the finals but it was a genius move that would only work with a bball genius like LeBron and a bunch of hard nosed defenders.

Cavs (post-allstar) had the number one offensive efficiency in the league. They also had the 11th best defense in the league (post-allstar).

Their offense would have been much much better, and their defense would have been worse (but not as big of a differential as their offense).

While that doesn't mean we would've won the championship, I can say with absolute certainty that as a whole, the Cavs ARE a better team with a healthy Love/Irving, and anyone suggesting otherwise is just ignorant.

lol, please
08-03-2015, 09:23 PM
Cavs (post-allstar) had the number one offensive efficiency in the league. They also had the 11th best defense in the league (post-allstar).

Their offense would have been much much better, and their defense would have been worse (but not as big of a differential as their offense).

While that doesn't mean we would've won the championship, I can say with absolute certainty that as a whole, the Cavs ARE a better team with a healthy Love/Irving, and anyone suggesting otherwise is just ignorant.
According to Draymond they suck though [emoji14]

Scoots
08-04-2015, 06:17 PM
Cavs (post-allstar) had the number one offensive efficiency in the league. They also had the 11th best defense in the league (post-allstar).

Their offense would have been much much better, and their defense would have been worse (but not as big of a differential as their offense).

While that doesn't mean we would've won the championship, I can say with absolute certainty that as a whole, the Cavs ARE a better team with a healthy Love/Irving, and anyone suggesting otherwise is just ignorant.

I wasn't close to saying that the team would be worse with Irving/Love, just that it's not a lock they would have won. And frankly I'd have liked to see that finals more than the one we got to see.

lol, please
08-04-2015, 11:15 PM
I wasn't close to saying that the team would be worse with Irving/Love, just that it's not a lock they would have won. And frankly I'd have liked to see that finals more than the one we got to see.
I can't lie I've been a Kyrie fan since he entered the league and was bummed out when he got injured.

FlashBolt
08-05-2015, 05:59 PM
So the Warriors took six games to beat the depleted Cavs but lol,please thinks the Warriors can beat the Bulls with the greatest player in the world, someone who would have made Draymond regret talking trash in Rodman, and the greatest wing defender (hi Curry) in Pippen... Sounds about right.

ILLUSIONIST^248
08-05-2015, 09:00 PM
So the Warriors took six games to beat the depleted Cavs but lol,please thinks the Warriors can beat the Bulls with the greatest player in the world, someone who would have made Draymond regret talking trash in Rodman, and the greatest wing defender (hi Curry) in Pippen... Sounds about right.


Or maybe his trolling skills are too much for you to handle .

FlashBolt
08-05-2015, 11:16 PM
Or maybe his trolling skills are too much for you to handle .
Speaking of trolls.. you're still here, huh? Some of you guys really spend your time trolling a sports forum, interesting.

FriedTofuz
08-06-2015, 05:22 AM
this is a troll thread.
no one is better than the 96 bulls, where is all the hate for the OP? Useless thread.

I made a thread saying the warriors were overrates after seeing this troll thread, it isnt even a question that The 96 bulls was the best team ever.

lol, please
08-06-2015, 05:36 PM
this is a troll thread.
no one is better than the 96 bulls, where is all the hate for the OP? Useless thread.

I made a thread saying the warriors were overrates after seeing this troll thread, it isnt even a question that The 96 bulls was the best team ever.
This warriors team is a top 5 team all time. Arguably top 3. Its a valid discussion. I think the Bulls prevail but not in less than 7 games.

Klay would give Jordan fits.

Hawkeye15
08-06-2015, 05:42 PM
this is a troll thread.
no one is better than the 96 bulls, where is all the hate for the OP? Useless thread.

I made a thread saying the warriors were overrates after seeing this troll thread, it isnt even a question that The 96 bulls was the best team ever.

That Bulls team probably is. I know it was an expansion year, but they literally mowed the NBA over that year haha. The 85-86' Celtics, and maybe even the 86-87' Lakers could push them. I especially think the Celtics might be able to, they coasted through the regular season, I think they could have won an additional 3-4 games that year if they wanted to. But proof is in the numbers, and the Bulls team was the best ever.

The greatest teams of all time tend to play better when the playoffs start, which is the only thing not helping GS when it comes to all time rankings.

Hawkeye15
08-06-2015, 05:43 PM
also, 13-14' Spurs deserve a mention. They won 12 playoff games by 15+ points, a record. After game 3 in Dallas, they destroyed everyone

effen5
08-06-2015, 08:44 PM
This warriors team is a top 5 team all time. Arguably top 3. Its a valid discussion. I think the Bulls prevail but not in less than 7 games.

Klay would give Jordan fits.

Terrible troll is terrible and klay wasn't even that good in the finals

lol, please
08-06-2015, 10:59 PM
Terrible troll is terrible and klay wasn't even that good in the finals
You're right, he wasn't, but he was good this season. How he performed in these finals really would have no bearing on a series with the Bulls, especially if we assume this matchup happens after this championship, Klay will be a grizzled finals vet.

Bartlee23
08-07-2015, 12:00 AM
This warriors team is a top 5 team all time. Arguably top 3. Its a valid discussion. I think the Bulls prevail but not in less than 7 games.

Klay would give Jordan fits.

This ranks up there as one of the worst threads ever created here. You must be 14 years old and this is the first finals you've ever seen. There are 10-15 teams easily that were better than Golden State that won championships that you have no clue about.

What made Golden State better than the Chicago, Laker,Boston,Houston,San Antonio,Miami teams,etc that dominated the league for multiple championships and have top players of all-time on them? (Please don't say they did,after Curry the talent dropped considerably ) It was Golden States year. Everything fell into place but please don't put them in a class they aren't in.

Golden State could not compete with Chicago and Klay would be able to do nothing against Jordan. It really would be embarrassing on his part to watch. Do you have any clue how good Jordan was? I've read through some off your comments and it just appears that you're not very old and really haven't seen too much basketball if this is what you truely believe. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but as far as yours go....wow.

lol, please
08-07-2015, 07:12 PM
This ranks up there as one of the worst threads ever created here. You must be 14 years old and this is the first finals you've ever seen. There are 10-15 teams easily that were better than Golden State that won championships that you have no clue about.

What made Golden State better than the Chicago, Laker,Boston,Houston,San Antonio,Miami teams,etc that dominated the league for multiple championships and have top players of all-time on them? (Please don't say they did,after Curry the talent dropped considerably ) It was Golden States year. Everything fell into place but please don't put them in a class they aren't in.

Golden State could not compete with Chicago and Klay would be able to do nothing against Jordan. It really would be embarrassing on his part to watch. Do you have any clue how good Jordan was? I've read through some off your comments and it just appears that you're not very old and really haven't seen too much basketball if this is what you truely believe. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but as far as yours go....wow.
15 teams better than this squad? Maybe 100 years from now. You couldn't name me 12 teams better than this warriors team if we paid you for it.

Bartlee23
08-07-2015, 11:17 PM
15 teams better than this squad? Maybe 100 years from now. You couldn't name me 12 teams better than this warriors team if we paid you for it.

Who is this "we" that is going to be paying me ??? Just starting in let's say the 90's since you're only 12-14.

Chicago: All 6 teams. Jordan and Pippen the best one-two punch ever in basketball. Golden State would have no answer for them. Rodman one of the top rebounders of all-time. Theses three are all hall of fame players and adding in Grant,Kukoc,Kerr,Paxson,Cartright,etc. Chicago with it's depth would dominate them.

Houston: 2 teams Olajuwon and Drexler again would be two players they would have no answer for. Both hall of famers and again adding Cassell,Smith,Horry,Maxwell,etc again it wouldn't be close domination.

San Antonio: 4 teams David Robinson,Tim Duncan,Tony Parker along with Ginobili and later Leonard and Green they would not be able to handle the well balanced, well coached team that find ways to win.

That's 12 right there. I have not even mentioned anything before 1990 which there are multiple teams better. I have not mentioned Boston of 2008 who I would argue was better, I have not mentioned any of the Miami or Los Angeles teams which I would also argue better as well ( and would probably have a majority of people agree with me.) So my suggestion is enjoy your championship. It was their year but they are not one of the greatest teams ever. Those words don't go together. Enjoy the rest of your summer and get ready to go back to school.

Silent
08-07-2015, 11:33 PM
Who is this "we" that is going to be paying me ??? Just starting in let's say the 90's since you're only 12-14.

Chicago: All 6 teams. Jordan and Pippen the best one-two punch ever in basketball. Golden State would have no answer for them. Rodman one of the top rebounders of all-time. Theses three are all hall of fame players and adding in Grant,Kukoc,Kerr,Paxson,Cartright,etc. Chicago with it's depth would dominate them.

Houston: 2 teams Olajuwon and Drexler again would be two players they would have no answer for. Both hall of famers and again adding Cassell,Smith,Horry,Maxwell,etc again it wouldn't be close domination.

San Antonio: 4 teams David Robinson,Tim Duncan,Tony Parker along with Ginobili and later Leonard and Green they would not be able to handle the well balanced, well coached team that find ways to win.

That's 12 right there. I have not even mentioned anything before 1990 which there are multiple teams better. I have not mentioned Boston of 2008 who I would argue was better, I have not mentioned any of the Miami or Los Angeles teams which I would also argue better as well ( and would probably have a majority of people agree with me.) So my suggestion is enjoy your championship. It was their year but they are not one of the greatest teams ever. Those words don't go together. Enjoy the rest of your summer and get ready to go back to school.

And u can add 1 more for SA after this year

IBleedPurple
08-08-2015, 05:45 AM
He may be a troll, but he's a good one.

Auseranami
08-08-2015, 09:56 AM
Chicago has too good a defense for the warriors. Curry would still probably get his, but jordan, pippen, and Rodman would shut down everyone else. I'd like to see bogut and lee go out rebound Rodman. That bulls team is the best ever. I don't know if any other team ever could beat them.

Newport05
08-08-2015, 10:24 AM
bulls sweep em winning by an average of 33 points each game. The mighty warriors manage to put up a hell of a fight in in game 3 and only lost by 28.

Scoots
08-08-2015, 04:09 PM
I voted Bulls in 5 so I don't think it's close, but I think it's closer than some on here think.

Important question ... which rules are they playing under? 2015 or 1996?

One of my favorite stats from this season was that Curry hit more 3s in the 2015 playoffs than Kerr did in his playoff career (enough playoff games that he won 5 rings).

Vee-Rex
08-08-2015, 05:52 PM
I voted Bulls in 5 so I don't think it's close, but I think it's closer than some on here think.

Important question ... which rules are they playing under? 2015 or 1996?

One of my favorite stats from this season was that Curry hit more 3s in the 2015 playoffs than Kerr did in his playoff career (enough playoff games that he won 5 rings).

I don't see how 'era' matters much for the Warriors. I feel like Warriors fans are quick to point out era as if somehow it would be a detriment for the the Bulls to play in 2015. Playing in 2015 would be entirely beneficial for the Bulls (way more foul calls, no handchecking, etc...).

In what way would playing in 2015 be detrimental for the Bulls?

lol, please
08-08-2015, 06:28 PM
bulls sweep em winning by an average of 33 points each game. The mighty warriors manage to put up a hell of a fight in in game 3 and only lost by 28.
33 point margins? Have some respect.

DaBear
08-08-2015, 08:36 PM
I don't see how 'era' matters much for the Warriors. I feel like Warriors fans are quick to point out era as if somehow it would be a detriment for the the Bulls to play in 2015. Playing in 2015 would be entirely beneficial for the Bulls (way more foul calls, no handchecking, etc...).

In what way would playing in 2015 be detrimental for the Bulls?

My thoughts are the same about this. Which is why it's not crazy to think a prime Jordan would average over 40ppg with today's rules.

lol, please
08-08-2015, 08:58 PM
My thoughts are the same about this. Which is why it's not crazy to think a prime Jordan would average over 40ppg with today's rules.
I think it depends on the player we are talking about and their respective strengths and weaknesses. I absolutely agree about Jordan though. The GOAT in any era.

Munkeysuit
08-08-2015, 09:55 PM
The Warriors had a great season, one of the greatest on record, but let's be real for a second here...are we really comparing the greatest team ever assembled to this Golden State Warrior team? even if it's for just one season, I mean come on guys! wth?

Scoots
08-08-2015, 10:29 PM
I don't see how 'era' matters much for the Warriors. I feel like Warriors fans are quick to point out era as if somehow it would be a detriment for the the Bulls to play in 2015. Playing in 2015 would be entirely beneficial for the Bulls (way more foul calls, no handchecking, etc...).

In what way would playing in 2015 be detrimental for the Bulls?

The current rules clog the lane more so there are fewer lanes for penetration putting an emphasis on outside shooting which the Warriors are better at. The current rules are much tighter on hand checking and physically controlling an opponent so if the Bulls played the way they did in 96 they would quickly foul out of the game.

Understand ... I said the Bulls would win in either set of rules, but in 96 rules the Bulls would dominate MORE because the Warriors are not built for that physical kind of game and the Bulls have (far) better players at attacking the rim.

IBleedPurple
08-09-2015, 12:21 PM
The Warriors had a great season, one of the greatest on record, but let's be real for a second here...are we really comparing the greatest team ever assembled to this Golden State Warrior team? even if it's for just one season, I mean come on guys! wth?It's only one, quite efficient troll.

lol, please
08-09-2015, 06:47 PM
The Warriors had a great season, one of the greatest on record, but let's be real for a second here...are we really comparing the greatest team ever assembled to this Golden State Warrior team? even if it's for just one season, I mean come on guys! wth?
The greatest team ever wasn't considered the greatest team ever until years later. I think it would be much closer than people think, and if the warriors dominate for several seasons more, as they should barring disastrous injuries, the comparison would be even closer, so yes, though Jordan and his Bulls are rightfully immortalized, and Curry and the warriors have just won their first finals and we are barely seeing the potentials flourishing of players like Green and Klay, I think it's a very valid discussion and will be even more so in 5 or 10 years.

FlashBolt
08-10-2015, 01:14 AM
The greatest team ever wasn't considered the greatest team ever until years later. I think it would be much closer than people think, and if the warriors dominate for several seasons more, as they should barring disastrous injuries, the comparison would be even closer, so yes, though Jordan and his Bulls are rightfully immortalized, and Curry and the warriors have just won their first finals and we are barely seeing the potentials flourishing of players like Green and Klay, I think it's a very valid discussion and will be even more so in 5 or 10 years.

Warriors took six games to beat a depleted Cavs roster. Yet, you're telling me they would beat the best record in NBA history, Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman?

IBleedPurple
08-10-2015, 08:00 AM
The greatest team ever wasn't considered the greatest team ever until years later. I think it would be much closer than people think, and if the warriors dominate for several seasons more, as they should barring disastrous injuries, the comparison would be even closer, so yes, though Jordan and his Bulls are rightfully immortalized, and Curry and the warriors have just won their first finals and we are barely seeing the potentials flourishing of players like Green and Klay, I think it's a very valid discussion and will be even more so in 5 or 10 years.

Warriors took six games to beat a depleted Cavs roster. Yet, you're telling me they would beat the best record in NBA history, Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman?Just keep repeating the username and it gets a lot easier to not be baited.

valade16
08-10-2015, 09:25 AM
91 Bulls votes, 5 Warriors votes.

Bulls with 94.7%. As far as a consensus, I think we've reached it...

lol, please
10-21-2015, 09:33 PM
Warriors took six games to beat a depleted Cavs roster. Yet, you're telling me they would beat the best record in NBA history, Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman?
Why not give credit to the Cavs? Just because the Warriors didn't sweep them, doesn't mean the Warriors are a worse team because of it. Flawed logic.

FlashBolt
10-21-2015, 10:16 PM
Why not give credit to the Cavs? Just because the Warriors didn't sweep them, doesn't mean the Warriors are a worse team because of it. Flawed logic.

The logic is that they would not beat Bulls because they could not beat a much lesser team in the Cavs decisively.. Tristan Thompson? Dennis Rodman beats him. Jordan beats LeBron. Scottie Pippen is 10x better than any other guy LeBron had on his team... So you need a reality check, the Warriors would not beat that Chicago Bulls team and it's very simple.

lol, please
10-26-2015, 09:08 PM
The logic is that they would not beat Bulls because they could not beat a much lesser team in the Cavs decisively.. Tristan Thompson? Dennis Rodman beats him. Jordan beats LeBron. Scottie Pippen is 10x better than any other guy LeBron had on his team... So you need a reality check, the Warriors would not beat that Chicago Bulls team and it's very simple.
That's really not fair to the warriors. So they didn't sweep them so they must be a worse team? And you have no idea how a Bulls/Cavaliers series would play out, especially a healthy Cavs team. I would say the Bills win in 5, but the Cavs could take it to 6 or 7.

FlashBolt
10-27-2015, 02:17 AM
That's really not fair to the warriors. So they didn't sweep them so they must be a worse team? And you have no idea how a Bulls/Cavaliers series would play out, especially a healthy Cavs team. I would say the Bills win in 5, but the Cavs could take it to 6 or 7.

That LeBron would not stand a chance against that Bulls team for obvious reason.

1) That's the best squad assembled. 72-10.
2) Michael was still in his prime. I think LeBron is playing past his prime and that is evident by his lack of athleticism the past season.
3) Kevin Love vs Rodman.. good luck Mr. Love.
4) Pippen will have a much easier time defending this type of LeBron. Heck, if Butler can make it tough on LeBron, what makes you think the greatest wing defender won't?
5) "I would say the Bulls in 5 but the Cavs in 6 or 7." Are you just typing because you feel like it? That's the most absurd prediction ever... your range of who wins makes it practically impossible to understand just how much you think a team can win.

It's VERY fair to say the Warriors would have lost. They should have swept the Cavs who were without two All-Stars and a squad that they fixed up just four months prior. They have no answer for MJ -- who was at the peak of his career and in case you didn't know, that was the year MJ finally developed a three point shot.

lol, please
11-13-2015, 10:31 PM
Ok so Curry now has had a better 10 game start than Jordan. Where are the people who said the idea was preposterous?

FlashBolt
11-13-2015, 11:01 PM
Ok so Curry now has had a better 10 game start than Jordan. Where are the people who said the idea was preposterous?

Do you even read your own question before typing? BTW, Curry has yet to face a team of Jordan's 95-96 Bulls.. arguably the greatest team ever so just because he is shooting lights out, you act as if Jordan never had legendary streaks. He actually had a streak in 95-96 that was quite comparable in terms of production. Let's stop with the Curry>Jordan nonsense. We all know who wins if it came down to it.

Phantom Dreamer
11-14-2015, 12:34 AM
Ok so Curry now has had a better 10 game start than Jordan. Where are the people who said the idea was preposterous?What does that have to do with the thread?

nastynice
11-14-2015, 12:36 AM
man, all of a sudden this doesn't seem like such a ridiculous question! These dudes are KILLIN it right now!

valade16
11-14-2015, 12:41 AM
Ok so Curry now has had a better 10 game start than Jordan. Where are the people who said the idea was preposterous?

10 game start perhaps (though I haven't looked up every start to MJ's career but what Curry's doing would make it hard to top), but best 10 game stretch? Not a chance.

In 1988 Jordan had 10 triple doubles in an 11 game stretch. He averaged 33.6 PPG, 10.8 RPG, 11.4 APG, 2.9 SPG on 51.0 FG%.

Heck, he had a playoff stretch of 10 games that season that was probably better (39.1 PPG, 8.4 RPG, 7.8 APG, 2.4 SPG on 53.4 FG%).

kdspurman
11-14-2015, 01:17 AM
man, all of a sudden this doesn't seem like such a ridiculous question! These dudes are KILLIN it right now!

Technically, it said the 14-15 Warriors :)

slashsnake
11-14-2015, 09:59 AM
Ok so Curry now has had a better 10 game start than Jordan. Where are the people who said the idea was preposterous?

Really? I was curious... Because Curry does remind me of MJ as a guy who's scoring like crazy... The rest, not as much. But lets see. I bolded the better numbers comparing best years.

And if you were talking 1995 Jordan in his first full season returning to basketball after his first retirement, then my bad, yes Curry did outplay that Jordan offensively.

Curry 33.3 PPG 5.6 assists, 5.3 boards, 2.6 steals, .3 blocks, 53% shooting

Jordan (88) 36.9 PPG, 5.8 assists, 6.1 boards, 3.6 steals, 1.3 blocks, 60% shooting





Curry had 1 50 pt game, and 4 20 point games, Jordan had 2 50 point games, and just 2 20 point games. Jordan had 1 game shooting under 50%, 2 shooting over 80% (4 under 50% and none over 80% for Curry)

Oh and the year before. Jordan 33.8 PPG, 5.5 boards, 5.7 assists, 3.8 steals, 1.4 blocks and 49% shooting

Oh and the year before that. Jordan 36.9 PPG, 5.7 boards, 3.4 assists, 2.6 steals, 1.8 blocks, and 48% shooting.

And a year later, 32.9 ppg, 6.9 boards, 5.6 assists, 2.4 steals, .3 blocks and 50% shooting

And a couple years later 31.6 PPG, 5.8 boards, 5.8 assists, 2.7 steals, .9 blocks and 60% shooting

ANd 4 years later 33.8 PPG, 5.7 boards, 6.1 assists, 2.5 steals, 1.5 blocks and 53% shooting



From 1986 until 1991 the AVERAGE Jordan game over the first 10 games of the season for a 6 year stretch was...

33.36 PPG, 6.1 RPG, 5.4 APG, 3.0 Steals, 1.1 blocks, 53% shooting...

So more points boards, steals, blocks, assists, the same shooting% (Curry a LOT more 3's Jordan a LOT more fouls drawn). So unless the argument is that Curry >>>>> Jordan playing individual D... I'd say Curry needs to pick it up a notch or 10.


Damn Jordan was dominant. And to think, that was on a pace of 3-5 fewer posessions per game for Jordan's Bulls back then.

AIRMAR72
11-14-2015, 10:17 AM
Bulls in 5 quite easily.

Pippen on Curry?

Correct

SPURSFAN1
11-14-2015, 03:07 PM
2015 warriors get *** on by the 2014 Spurs. :worthy:

SPURSFAN1
11-14-2015, 03:08 PM
And u can add 1 more for SA after this year

My man right hurr.

lol, please
11-14-2015, 09:13 PM
2015 warriors get *** on by the 2014 Spurs. :worthy:
Don't get your hopes up bud. I could see a series going 6 games, but the Spurs would be hard pressed to win that series if both teams are healthy

bgdreton
11-14-2015, 11:23 PM
2015 warriors get *** on by the 2014 Spurs. :worthy:

Where does the title say anything about the Spurs?

Teufelshunde4
11-14-2015, 11:37 PM
Damn Jordan was dominant. And to think, that was on a pace of 3-5 fewer posessions per game for Jordan's Bulls back then.

Don't forget the fact that hand checking was allowed then. And then hard fouls were also the normal part of the game. Curry is awesome but it's awfully hard to top MJ..

lol, please
11-15-2015, 12:35 AM
Don't forget the fact that hand checking was allowed then. And then hard fouls were also the normal part of the game. Curry is awesome but it's awfully hard to top MJ..
Are you implying Curry is soft lol? He would bully guys like Pippen and Rodman working his way inside

valade16
11-15-2015, 12:42 AM
Are you implying Curry is soft lol? He would bully guys like Pippen and Rodman working his way inside

Is this some kind of joke?

lol, please
11-15-2015, 12:43 AM
Is this some kind of joke?
Sorry, a bit fired up here for this Nets game!

:drunk: