2012-2013 NBA thread

[Balta1701]

I don't think stopping Shaq would have been the key to beating those Laker teams, anymore than it was in beating his Orlando teams (excluding the series when Jordan had just come back from baseball). They'd play hack-a-Shaq, and he'd get his points, but it would come down to other match-ups. I do agree that the Bulls still win.

Which team gets Phil?

[Jordan4life_2007]

Well, I hate to be that guy again - but I will.

 

1:So, 54 year old/old-timer comes out publicly and says his era was tougher, this era sucks, LeBron would be average, yadda, yadda, yadda. Gee, what a shock! Past players are always going to pump up their own era while dismissing others. The things Wilt used to say about Michael and his era? Sheet.

 

2: Who the f*** from the 80's is checkin' LeBron? lol. He'd be the biggest player on the court by far with athleticism and a skill-set at his size nobody had ever seen. He'd force multiple rule changes by himself. LeBron would f***in' destroy the 80's.

 

3: Now I do concede I drink a lot. But I don't recall the Bulls ever sweeping through a post-season. They did lose every now and then. They damn near lost to a team with John Starks as it's second best player. They needed 6 games to beat a team that employed Ervin (don't ever call him Magic) Johnson as it's starting C. They needed superhuman efforts from MJ to beat a team (the Jazz) who ran out a 6'1 white SG, a 7'0 sloth at C and Bryon Russell. The Bulls never saw a team during their entire run as good as the Heat. This notion that the Bulls would sweep the Heat by an average of 25 ppg is ridiculous and blatant homerism at it's finest.

 

4: People need to stop acting like hand-checking is the equivalent to steroids in baseball. It is not a skill to hold, grab, shove, jab and molest somebody. If the internet and social media had been around in the 80's, everybody would be cursing the league for allowing that type of defense to be played. Look at how you guys b**** about the refs now. lmao. stop it.

 

5: Not only would the Heat present a ton of problems for the Bulls, but so would every NBA champion since '07 save for the '11 Mavs. Duncan by himself is a major issue (especially the '07 version). Bowen is one of the top 5 on-ball, lockdown defenders of the last 20 years. Yes, Michael's gonna get his. But Bowen is a little better on D than Byron Scott, Hersey Hawkins, Craig Ehlo, Dan Majerle and Jeff Hornacek. Parker and Ginobili's quickness, athleticism and skill-sets on the perimeter could/would cause major problems. Especially if we're talking the late 90's Bulls (early 90's is different).

 

the '08 Celtics would also cause problems. That team for that year was every bit as good defensively as any of those Bulls teams (check the numbers). And guess what?!!! They did IT WITHOUT handchecking!!! yayyyy. KG and his size, length, and skill-set would be a problem. Pierce/Allen/Rondo would be better than anything the Bulls saw. They'd be able to throw Pierce, Posey or Tony Allen, all three being good to great defenders at MJ.

 

'09/'10 Lakers. The Bulls would be at a major disadvantage size wise against that freak of a Laker front-court. Kobe's going to come as close as anybody to matching Jordan.

 

Already covered the Heat. I am not saying ANY of these teams would beat the Bulls. But to act as if they could just rollover every recent NBA champ? Get the f*** outta here.

Edited June 7, 2013 by Jordan4life

[Jordan4life_2007]

"They are trying to sell today's game, not the game from the 1960's, 70's or 80's."

 

-Wilt Chamberlain on the NBA at 50 celebration in 1996

 

No other major sport propagandizes that one particular player is the best ever. Why is Basketball so different? Because David Stern is trying to sell his current game by calling Jordan "unquestionably the best ever". The late Wilt Chamberlain said it best: "If Michael was here right now, I would say to him: When you are so great that the league tries to change the rules in an attempt to stop you then you can claim you are the best ever. Every rule change I have seen during your career has been meant to enhance your game (such as shortened 3 point line, hand checking rules & well defined rules regarding illegal defenses)." Wilt also went on further to discuss how players of his day did not have the luxury of regular National T.V. broadcasts to promote their talents to the public. Modern players have the luxuries of chartered jets, first class hotels, modern sports medicine, fewer games on back-to-back nights, illegal defenses, looser rules governing assists, the 3 point line and superstars getting preferential treatment from referees. 1960's refs freely admit that they let players foul Wilt Chamberlain when he did not have the ball "to help them"defend him. Contrast this with today when superstars are coddled by officials. In spite of all these luxuries afforded to modern players Wilt Chamberlain (who retired 28 years ago) still holds 50 regular season records, many of which are in the untouchable realm. Contrast this with Michael Jordan who in spite of getting more preferential treatment from officials than any other player in history holds a whopping 4 regular season records

 

http://pweb.netcom.com/~bjalas/basketball/bulls/love.htm

 

Wilt said a lot more than this in his book.

 

Rodman's comments mean nothing. That's just what old folks do.

[MexSoxFan#1]

The "today's era is the best ever" crowd are every bit as bad as "my era > any era" crowd IMO. Every era had it's weaknesses and strengths and it's really hard to compare across eras.

 

For me, MJ was the best player I have ever seen and that includes peak LBJ, Kobe, Shaq, Duncan, Olajuwon, Barkley, Malone, Bird and Magic. I can't say for sure that he was better than KAJ, Wilt, Oscar, Elgin and Russell (much to your chagrin, J4L) because I never saw them in their prime and I'm not against the notion that they were as great as Jordan if not better.

 

From the time I started watching the NBA (mid 80s) to now, MJ is clearly the best player in that time frame, IMO.

Edited June 8, 2013 by MexSoxFan#1

[ZoomSlowik]

Well, I hate to be that guy again - but I will.

 

1:So, 54 year old/old-timer comes out publicly and says his era was tougher, this era sucks, LeBron would be average, yadda, yadda, yadda. Gee, what a shock! Past players are always going to pump up their own era while dismissing others. The things Wilt used to say about Michael and his era? Sheet.

 

2: Who the f*** from the 80's is checkin' LeBron? lol. He'd be the biggest player on the court by far with athleticism and a skill-set at his size nobody had ever seen. He'd force multiple rule changes by himself. LeBron would f***in' destroy the 80's.

 

3: Now I do concede I drink a lot. But I don't recall the Bulls ever sweeping through a post-season. They did lose every now and then. They damn near lost to a team with John Starks as it's second best player. They needed 6 games to beat a team that employed Ervin (don't ever call him Magic) Johnson as it's starting C. They needed superhuman efforts from MJ to beat a team (the Jazz) who ran out a 6'1 white SG, a 7'0 sloth at C and Bryon Russell. The Bulls never saw a team during their entire run as good as the Heat. This notion that the Bulls would sweep the Heat by an average of 25 ppg is ridiculous and blatant homerism at it's finest.

 

4: People need to stop acting like hand-checking is the equivalent to steroids in baseball. It is not a skill to hold, grab, shove, jab and molest somebody. If the internet and social media had been around in the 80's, everybody would be cursing the league for allowing that type of defense to be played. Look at how you guys b**** about the refs now. lmao. stop it.

 

5: Not only would the Heat present a ton of problems for the Bulls, but so would every NBA champion since '07 save for the '11 Mavs. Duncan by himself is a major issue (especially the '07 version). Bowen is one of the top 5 on-ball, lockdown defenders of the last 20 years. Yes, Michael's gonna get his. But Bowen is a little better on D than Byron Scott, Hersey Hawkins, Craig Ehlo, Dan Majerle and Jeff Hornacek. Parker and Ginobili's quickness, athleticism and skill-sets on the perimeter could/would cause major problems. Especially if we're talking the late 90's Bulls (early 90's is different).

 

the '08 Celtics would also cause problems. That team for that year was every bit as good defensively as any of those Bulls teams (check the numbers). And guess what?!!! They did IT WITHOUT handchecking!!! yayyyy. KG and his size, length, and skill-set would be a problem. Pierce/Allen/Rondo would be better than anything the Bulls saw. They'd be able to throw Pierce, Posey or Tony Allen, all three being good to great defenders at MJ.

 

'09/'10 Lakers. The Bulls would be at a major disadvantage size wise against that freak of a Laker front-court. Kobe's going to come as close as anybody to matching Jordan.

 

Already covered the Heat. I am not saying ANY of these teams would beat the Bulls. But to act as if they could just rollover every recent NBA champ? Get the f*** outta here.

 

-No one in this thread said Lebron would struggle in the 90's, or that the Bulls would "beat the Heat every game by 25".

 

-The handchecking is brought up for exactly that reason. The physicality makes it harder for the really talented players to do their thing, and yet numerous guys did it anyways.

 

-The Bulls beat the Lakers in 5, not 6. I don't really care if Magic was their center, he was really damn good. Besides, Lebron is frequently the biggest/toughest guy in Miami lineups, so I don't see how that matters.

 

Other than that, I'm not going to write a bunch of stuff that you'll dismiss with "lol, athletes". The Bulls won 6 titles for a reason, and it's not like it was a white only, 6-feet and under league before 2005.

[MexSoxFan#1]

It's also boring the way J4L dismisses the early 90s Knicks. That team was built around strong interior defense and rebounding. Offense wasn't how they won games. They were also coached by a pretty damn good coach. It's hard to judge across eras but they would be a match up nightmare for this year's Heat. If Indiana could push Miami to 7 games while making Hibbert look legit, imagine how NY's FC of Ewing, Oakley, X, Mason would fare. They would obliterate Miami on the glass. Plus Starks, as much as J4L makes fun of him, was a pretty good defensive SG (of course he was no match for peak Jordan but who was?), I could see him easily locking down current Wade. Oakley would have Bosh in a fetal position. Bron would get his because, well, he would be great in any era but that Knicks team matches up pretty well to this Heat team purely based on match ups.

 

[Jordan4life_2007]

Zoom, I was referring to the '96 Supersonics. Not the '91 Lakers. Jenks said LeBron is great but to reach his true potential he would've had to play in the 80's. Jason said the only team that could even bother the Bulls since '98 are the Shaq/Kobe Lakers. Wite said the Heat couldn't break 85 ppg with handchecking against the Bulls. Nobody disagreed. Let me say something that can even be mistaken for anti-Bulls or anti 90's, my stalkers commence. This is a homer thread and everybody knows it.

 

Mex, John Starks was garbage. An all-star or close to all star sg by 90's standards because the position was garbage. Other than MJ, there was no sg that could shoot, put the ball on the floor/penetrate, and create for teammates. Clyde Drexler was the closest but he couldn't even dribble with his left hand. The Knicks were nasty defensively and could board. But they were complete tools on the offensive end and were exposed every year (couldn't even win when MJ was gone).

[ZoomSlowik]

Zoom, I was referring to the '96 Supersonics. Not the '91 Lakers. Jenks said LeBron is great but to reach his true potential he would've had to play in the 80's. Jason said the only team that could even bother the Bulls since '98 are the Shaq/Kobe Lakers. Wite said the Heat couldn't break 85 ppg with handchecking against the Bulls. Nobody disagreed. Let me say something that can even be mistaken for anti-Bulls or anti 90's, my stalkers commence. This is a homer thread and everybody knows it.

 

Mex, John Starks was garbage. An all-star or close to all star sg by 90's standards because the position was garbage. Other than MJ, there was no sg that could shoot, put the ball on the floor/penetrate, and create for teammates. Clyde Drexler was the closest but he couldn't even dribble with his left hand. The Knicks were nasty defensively and could board. But they were complete tools on the offensive end and were exposed every year (couldn't even win when MJ was gone).

 

Ah, I honestly forgot Johnson started because Sam Perkins played when it mattered. Johnson played about 18 MPG, Perkins played 26 in the regular season and 31 in the playoffs. He was a guy that could step out and hit a jumper, but definitely hurt them because he lacked toughness inside. Sound like someone we know (Before you freak out, Bosh is clearly better. He looks like crap now though and Perkins was their 5th best player, not 3rd)? Those Sonics were extremely talented and would have a much easier time if they didn't have to go through guys like Hakeem, Barkley, Robinson and Malone every year (yeah, I know Mutombo got them once).

 

John Starks was pretty mediocre. He had a couple good years and snuck onto an All-Star team. Weird things happen occasionally, kind of like Luol Deng getting onto the last two All-Star teams. Drexler, Reggie, Dumars and Mitch Richmond were all far better shooting guards and there were others better as well. You mentioned Hersey Hawkins, but I don't think you actually looked at his stats page. He was a damn good shooter and put up 20 PPG early in his career on solid efficiency before fitting in as a 3rd/4th scorer on good teams.

 

Also, it's not like Starks was New York's obvious second "best" player. Second leading scorer, okay, but others were more valuable to the team. Charles Oakley and Anthony Mason were both key inside and Mark Jackson was pretty solid at the point when he was there. It's not like it was Ewing, Starks and crappy role players.

 

As I've said before, who are all these modern shooting guards that can do EVERYTHING? You have a few geriatrics hanging around at the tail end of their career (guys like Manu, Pierce and Johnson aren't nearly as effective getting to the rim as they used to be), but the only younger guy is Harden. Maybe Eric Gordon, but he's always hurt. I'm sure you'll say Klay Thompson, but he hasn't shown much ability to get to the rim yet (Marco Belinelli had about as many attempts at the rim despite far less PT and fewer touches).

 

Look at the shooting guards on all your contenders. Wade is a fading stud, but even with him he's a highly mediocre shooter. Danny Green is a fantastic shooter, but has limited offensive skills outside of that. Thabo Sefolosha, Tony Allen and Lance Stephenson all suck on offense, and Stephenson really just sucks. Jimmy Butler is okay, but scored 13 points in like 4,000 MPG. The Clippers trotted out Willie Green (awful) and Chauncey Billups (chalk outline of his former self) all year. Wow, such awesome shooting guards that can do it all!

 

Don't give me guys like T-Mac and Carter either, the former was done several years ago and Carter has been a role player for a while. If you want to talk closer to 2005, there were more legit wings, but very few teams had CENTERS that could bother the Bulls. That's an important distinction because they handled teams led by guys like Barkley, Kemp and Malone in the playoffs. Grant and Rodman weren't exactly issues on that end. Every one of those teams you mentioned had an offensive liability at one of their big spots except for the the Lakers with Bynum in 09/10.

 

Every era has their strengths and weaknesses. The league was horrible from the late 90's to the mid-2000's, largely because of weak PG's, but they had very good wings and a few stellar bigs. The late 80's/early 90's had a ton of bigs and some scattered stars and a lot of solid players, but not a lot of super-duper stars on the perimeter. And as I've said a few times, the modern era has two elite SF's and a plethora of point guards, but they also have pretty horrible bigs and few wings that can consistently dominate.

Edited June 9, 2013 by ZoomSlowik

[ZoomSlowik]

I don't think stopping Shaq would have been the key to beating those Laker teams, anymore than it was in beating his Orlando teams (excluding the series when Jordan had just come back from baseball). They'd play hack-a-Shaq, and he'd get his points, but it would come down to other match-ups. I do agree that the Bulls still win.

 

That Magic team wasn't together nearly long enough to establish any kind of pattern. They were really only together for three seasons.

 

93-94 was Hardaway's rookie year and they lost in the first round. They didn't face the Bulls.

 

94-95 they added Horace Grant and beat the Bulls before getting swept by Hakeem/Drexler in the finals. Yes, Michael wasn't quite right yet, but he still put up 31-6-5 that postseason while shooting 48% from the floor. It's not like he pulled an '11 Finals Lebron. The bigger issue was that they didn't have Rodman yet so their frontcourt was pretty weak.

 

95-96 the Bulls smoked them, but Grant missed most of that series and Nick Anderson missed a game as well.

 

Shaq left for LA in 96 and Penny started getting hurt after that. Had that team been together longer or had better timing/luck, they might have been a juggernaut. They had two stars and three very solid role players. IMO, that's the best/most talented team I've seen that didn't win a ring.

Edited June 8, 2013 by ZoomSlowik

[Boogua]

That Magic team wasn't together nearly long enough to establish any kind of pattern. They were really only together for three seasons.

 

93-94 was Hardaway's rookie year and they lost in the first round. They didn't face the Bulls.

 

94-95 they added Horace Grant and beat the Bulls before getting swept by Hakeem/Drexler in the finals. Yes, Michael wasn't quite right yet, but he still put up 31-6-5 that postseason while shooting 48% from the floor. It's not like he pulled an '11 Finals Lebron. The bigger issue was that they didn't have Rodman yet so their frontcourt was pretty weak.

 

95-96 the Bulls smoked them, but Grant missed most of that series and Nick Anderson missed a game as well.

 

Shaq left for LA in 96 and Penny started getting hurt after that. Had that team been together longer or had better timing/luck, they might have been a juggernaut. They had two stars and three very solid role players. IMO, that's the best/most talented team I've seen that didn't win a ring.

Yes, he put up good numbers, but averaged 4 turnovers a game. His PER in the playoffs was the lowest ever outside of his first playoffs experience. I think that was the biggest issue. If Jordan was his normal self I think they win that series. I mean he went 8-22 with 19 points, 5 rebounds, 3 assists, and 8 turnovers in game one that series. They lost by 3...

[Boogua]

Well, I hate to be that guy again - but I will.

 

1:So, 54 year old/old-timer comes out publicly and says his era was tougher, this era sucks, LeBron would be average, yadda, yadda, yadda. Gee, what a shock! Past players are always going to pump up their own era while dismissing others. The things Wilt used to say about Michael and his era? Sheet.

 

2: Who the f*** from the 80's is checkin' LeBron? lol. He'd be the biggest player on the court by far with athleticism and a skill-set at his size nobody had ever seen. He'd force multiple rule changes by himself. LeBron would f***in' destroy the 80's.

 

3: Now I do concede I drink a lot. But I don't recall the Bulls ever sweeping through a post-season. They did lose every now and then. They damn near lost to a team with John Starks as it's second best player. They needed 6 games to beat a team that employed Ervin (don't ever call him Magic) Johnson as it's starting C. They needed superhuman efforts from MJ to beat a team (the Jazz) who ran out a 6'1 white SG, a 7'0 sloth at C and Bryon Russell. The Bulls never saw a team during their entire run as good as the Heat. This notion that the Bulls would sweep the Heat by an average of 25 ppg is ridiculous and blatant homerism at it's finest.

 

4: People need to stop acting like hand-checking is the equivalent to steroids in baseball. It is not a skill to hold, grab, shove, jab and molest somebody. If the internet and social media had been around in the 80's, everybody would be cursing the league for allowing that type of defense to be played. Look at how you guys b**** about the refs now. lmao. stop it.

 

5: Not only would the Heat present a ton of problems for the Bulls, but so would every NBA champion since '07 save for the '11 Mavs. Duncan by himself is a major issue (especially the '07 version). Bowen is one of the top 5 on-ball, lockdown defenders of the last 20 years. Yes, Michael's gonna get his. But Bowen is a little better on D than Byron Scott, Hersey Hawkins, Craig Ehlo, Dan Majerle and Jeff Hornacek. Parker and Ginobili's quickness, athleticism and skill-sets on the perimeter could/would cause major problems. Especially if we're talking the late 90's Bulls (early 90's is different).

 

the '08 Celtics would also cause problems. That team for that year was every bit as good defensively as any of those Bulls teams (check the numbers). And guess what?!!! They did IT WITHOUT handchecking!!! yayyyy. KG and his size, length, and skill-set would be a problem. Pierce/Allen/Rondo would be better than anything the Bulls saw. They'd be able to throw Pierce, Posey or Tony Allen, all three being good to great defenders at MJ.

 

'09/'10 Lakers. The Bulls would be at a major disadvantage size wise against that freak of a Laker front-court. Kobe's going to come as close as anybody to matching Jordan.

 

Already covered the Heat. I am not saying ANY of these teams would beat the Bulls. But to act as if they could just rollover every recent NBA champ? Get the f*** outta here.

1. Wilt played a few eras before Michael. This is different. Hell, Rodman played against and with some current NBA players (Kobe, Duncan, Allen, Garnett, etc). His opinion, while it may be wrong, should hold more weight than WIlt's based on that.

 

2. What rule changes would he force? He would do well in the 80s for sure because it was uptempo, but why would he do better than Mike? The dude asked to sit out the in the beginning of the fourth quarter because he was tired. This was in a FINALS game and the tempo wasn't what it was in the 80s. He would probably have to slim down a bit to keep the tempo in the 80s.

 

3. The 91 Bulls went 15-2 in the playoffs and lost their 2 games by a combined 4 points. They needed 5 games to beat a team with Ervin (people call him Magic) Johnson in the finals and the one loss was by 2 points.

 

4. It's harder to score against the handcheck. You can dislike it all you want, but this much is true.

 

5. Jordan would do fine against Bowen. Early 90s Mike would have torched Bowen because Bowen wouldn't be quick enough to guard him. It also depends on what rules we're playing with. Parker and Ginobili would have problems with the physicality those late 90s bulls played with.

 

The 08 Celtics had to face 08 offenses so it's different. They changed the rules after 04 because offenses were so bad against the handcheck. Just because they didn't use the handcheck in 08 doesn't mean they're a better defense overall. The offense could have just been worse. Yayyy.

 

Pierce? Seriously? Jordan put up 25-13-7 his last game against Pierce and this was with handchecking. Mike was 40. I think he would be okay.

 

I just don't understand how your name is "Jordan4life" yet you don't give the guy the respect he deserves. I'm sure you'll say something like "He just gets overrated and I'm just trying to be real!111!", but you're not dude. Old Jordan played against most of the guys that Lebron averaged 18 PPG against in a finals (Marion, Kidd, Dirk, Chandler) and he did fine. There are youtube videos of old Mike torching Marion, Kidd, and Pierce (among others). Come on man.

[chicagostatecougars]

I shudder to think what a team like the '94 Knicks would do to this current Heat squad. If a bum like Roy Hibbert could inflict that level of ownage, what would Patrick Ewing be able to do? Or the '95/'96 Magic...who the hell checks Shaq? He probably averages 35/14 if not better.

[chicagostatecougars]

1. Wilt played a few eras before Michael. This is different. Hell, Rodman played against and with some current NBA players (Kobe, Duncan, Allen, Garnett, etc). His opinion, while it may be wrong, should hold more weight than WIlt's based on that.

 

2. What rule changes would he force? He would do well in the 80s for sure because it was uptempo, but why would he do better than Mike? The dude asked to sit out the in the beginning of the fourth quarter because he was tired. This was in a FINALS game and the tempo wasn't what it was in the 80s. He would probably have to slim down a bit to keep the tempo in the 80s.

 

3. The 91 Bulls went 15-2 in the playoffs and lost their 2 games by a combined 4 points. They needed 5 games to beat a team with Ervin (people call him Magic) Johnson in the finals and the one loss was by 2 points.

 

4. It's harder to score against the handcheck. You can dislike it all you want, but this much is true.

 

5. Jordan would do fine against Bowen. Early 90s Mike would have torched Bowen because Bowen wouldn't be quick enough to guard him. It also depends on what rules we're playing with. Parker and Ginobili would have problems with the physicality those late 90s bulls played with.

 

The 08 Celtics had to face 08 offenses so it's different. They changed the rules after 04 because offenses were so bad against the handcheck. Just because they didn't use the handcheck in 08 doesn't mean they're a better defense overall. The offense could have just been worse. Yayyy.

 

Pierce? Seriously? Jordan put up 25-13-7 his last game against Pierce and this was with handchecking. Mike was 40. I think he would be okay.

 

I just don't understand how your name is "Jordan4life" yet you don't give the guy the respect he deserves. I'm sure you'll say something like "He just gets overrated and I'm just trying to be real!111!", but you're not dude. Old Jordan played against most of the guys that Lebron averaged 18 PPG against in a finals (Marion, Kidd, Dirk, Chandler) and he did fine. There are youtube videos of old Mike torching Marion, Kidd, and Pierce (among others). Come on man.

 

First time I've looked at this part of the forum but this post really stands out. It's apparent that you know the NBA very well (probably more that most posters here) and your argument is pretty hard to refute.

 

/End argument

 

[chicagostatecougars]

Gotta disagree with Rodman. Lebron would still be good in the 90s. I see him as a 3rd (maybe 2nd) team all-NBA type guy. 21-23 ppg on lower efficiency but still very effective. Probably behind Pippen in terms of defensive impact but then again Pippen is easily the GOAT defensive small forward.

Edited June 8, 2013 by chicagostatecougars

[ZoomSlowik]

Yes, he put up good numbers, but averaged 4 turnovers a game. His PER in the playoffs was the lowest ever outside of his first playoffs experience. I think that was the biggest issue. If Jordan was his normal self I think they win that series. I mean he went 8-22 with 19 points, 5 rebounds, 3 assists, and 8 turnovers in game one that series. They lost by 3...

 

Maybe, he did have 3 mediocre to poor games. The Bulls got killed inside though. Shaq got his 23 a game, but the real issue was Grant, who averaged 18 a game on 65% shooting. I doubt he does that against Rodman.

 

 

[ZoomSlowik]

I found this kind of funny (via Rotoworld):

 

"My goal is to win more than five," Bryant said while discussing the Spurs. "If [Tim Duncan] does win five, hopefully that pushes our organization upstairs to be even more determined and more driven to make the necessary expenses to make sure we continue the next year and the year after that."

 

Seriously? Your team went out and got Dwight Howard and Steve Nash last year and had a $100 million payroll. What are they supposed to do, find a way to get Durant?

[MexSoxFan#1]

1. Wilt played a few eras before Michael. This is different. Hell, Rodman played against and with some current NBA players (Kobe, Duncan, Allen, Garnett, etc). His opinion, while it may be wrong, should hold more weight than WIlt's based on that.

 

2. What rule changes would he force? He would do well in the 80s for sure because it was uptempo, but why would he do better than Mike? The dude asked to sit out the in the beginning of the fourth quarter because he was tired. This was in a FINALS game and the tempo wasn't what it was in the 80s. He would probably have to slim down a bit to keep the tempo in the 80s.

 

3. The 91 Bulls went 15-2 in the playoffs and lost their 2 games by a combined 4 points. They needed 5 games to beat a team with Ervin (people call him Magic) Johnson in the finals and the one loss was by 2 points.

 

4. It's harder to score against the handcheck. You can dislike it all you want, but this much is true.

 

5. Jordan would do fine against Bowen. Early 90s Mike would have torched Bowen because Bowen wouldn't be quick enough to guard him. It also depends on what rules we're playing with. Parker and Ginobili would have problems with the physicality those late 90s bulls played with.

 

The 08 Celtics had to face 08 offenses so it's different. They changed the rules after 04 because offenses were so bad against the handcheck. Just because they didn't use the handcheck in 08 doesn't mean they're a better defense overall. The offense could have just been worse. Yayyy.

 

Pierce? Seriously? Jordan put up 25-13-7 his last game against Pierce and this was with handchecking. Mike was 40. I think he would be okay.

 

I just don't understand how your name is "Jordan4life" yet you don't give the guy the respect he deserves. I'm sure you'll say something like "He just gets overrated and I'm just trying to be real!111!", but you're not dude. Old Jordan played against most of the guys that Lebron averaged 18 PPG against in a finals (Marion, Kidd, Dirk, Chandler) and he did fine. There are youtube videos of old Mike torching Marion, Kidd, and Pierce (among others). Come on man.

Great post

 

[Jordan4life_2007]

Gotta disagree with Rodman. Lebron would still be good in the 90s. I see him as a 3rd (maybe 2nd) team all-NBA type guy. 21-23 ppg on lower efficiency but still very effective. Probably behind Pippen in terms of defensive impact but then again Pippen is easily the GOAT defensive small forward.

 

LMAO. Not ONE reply? This thread is awful.

[MexSoxFan#1]

LMAO. Not ONE reply? This thread is awful.

I'm sure you have nothing to do with it being awful...

[chicagostatecougars]

Lebron is a tremendous player and a Hall of Famer. But his efficiency definitely would go down with handchecking, physical play, hard fouls and more elite shot blockers protecting the paint. Not too crazy right?

[Quin]

The 90's Stars:

 

PG: Payton, Stockton, Hardaway, Johnson, Price

SG: Jordan, Drexler, Dumars, Richmond, Miller

SF: Pippin, Hill, Wilkins, Mullin, Schrempf

PF: Malone, Barkley, Rodman, Kemp, Grant

C: Olajuwon, Ewing, Mourning, Shaq, Robinson

 

To say that LeBron would be a third team All-NBA with Pippin, Hill, Malone, and Barkley is not THAT outrageous.

[justBLAZE]

The 90's Stars:

 

PG: Payton, Stockton, Hardaway, Johnson, Price

SG: Jordan, Drexler, Dumars, Richmond, Miller

SF: Pippin, Hill, Wilkins, Mullin, Schrempf

PF: Malone, Barkley, Rodman, Kemp, Grant

C: Olajuwon, Ewing, Mourning, Shaq, Robinson

 

To say that LeBron would be a third team All-NBA with Pippin, Hill, Malone, and Barkley is not THAT outrageous.

 

PippEn.

[Jordan4life_2007]

I'm sure you have nothing to do with it being awful...

 

I'm the best thing to ever happened to this thread. Without me, this thread is a bunch of middle-aged homers crying about referees every single day of the year.

 

Lebron is a tremendous player and a Hall of Famer. But his efficiency definitely would go down with handchecking, physical play, hard fouls and more elite shot blockers protecting the paint. Not too crazy right?

 

Not even close. Putting your hands on the most physically gifted player the game has ever seen wouldn't mean a thing. He'd even be better against inferior, one dimensional athletes, and no zone defense.

 

 

The 90's Stars:

 

PG: Payton, Stockton, Hardaway, Johnson, Price

SG: Jordan, Drexler, Dumars, Richmond, Miller

SF: Pippin, Hill, Wilkins, Mullin, Schrempf

PF: Malone, Barkley, Rodman, Kemp, Grant

C: Olajuwon, Ewing, Mourning, Shaq, Robinson

 

To say that LeBron would be a third team All-NBA with Pippin, Hill, Malone, and Barkley is not THAT outrageous.

 

C'mon, q. You weren't even a fetus when most of these guys were playing. Other than Jordan, LeBron trumps every player here without question. Mark Price? C'mon, dude. People like to make fun of Nash and his d. Who's Price checking today? lol.

 

I will respond to Zoom and Booqua (amazing that he actually came with something besides piggybacking zoom) in detail later when I'm sober.

Edited June 9, 2013 by Jordan4life

[Quin]

I'm the best thing to ever happened to this thread. Without me, this thread is a bunch of middle-aged homers crying about referees every single day of the year.

 

 

 

Not even close. Putting your hands on the most physically gifted player the game has ever seen wouldn't mean a thing. He'd even be better against inferior, one dimensional athletes, and no zone defense.

 

 

 

 

C'mon, q. You weren't even a fetus when most of these guys were playing. Other than Jordan, LeBron trumps every player here without question. Mark Price? C'mon, dude. People like to make fun of Nash and his d. Who's Price checking today? lol.

 

I will respond to Zoom and Booqua (amazing that he actually came with something besides piggybacking zoom) in detail later when I'm sober.

 

I just posted NBA.com's All 90's team.

 

And I dunno if LeBron trumps Hakeem. And there would be years where Pippen, Hill, Barkley or Malone could be better at forward.

 

Thing is we don't know. But a lot of those guys would be the undisputed #2 in today's NBA, so it's not out of the realm of possibility that LeBron wouldn't easily be the second best player.

 

For fun, let's replace Larry Johnson with LeBron on those Hornets teams. Taken at the same time.

 

Is LeBron winning any titles?

Edited June 9, 2013 by Quinarvy

[bmags]

Joey Crawford officiating tonight. Heat have it in the bag.