MaxFly Posted September 30, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 (edited) Well the Bulls couldn't beat the Knicks without Jordan in '94, they were very good team and they had a lot of chemistry but Jordan was a clutch player, they were missing him at the end of the games, the Bulls would probably still make the playoffs from '96-98 without Jordan too but they sure wouldn't win a championship in those years, you need the combination of Jordan's clutchness and the role players playing their roles to win, in the '80s he was very good but the reason that a lot of the reasons why the Bulls couldn't win championships 'cause the rosters on those Bulls teams was too much of a revolving door, if players play together a long time they could win, usually that's how dynasties are, the Bulls were a special team and Jordan was a special player, and now how could somebody who scored basically 30 points a game and win 6 championship rings in the golden age of basketball be overhyped? He made the playoffs basically every year too, getting away from just championships, that's an accomplishment in itself too, just making the playoffs for the Bulls was an accomplishment, he brought excitement immediately to the team from his rookie year, they were only winning like 20 games a year for a while when he got drafted, all the things that Jordan did it's hard to say he was overhyped, he deserves to mentioned as the greatest, a lot of the older players and younger players would tell you so too, considering all the hype a lot of these players get today it's hard to really call him overhyped, that's like calling LL Cool J overhyped when rappers like 50 Cent get much more hype when they haven't really done anything special musically that LL's never done Actually, the Bulls could have beaten the Knicks in 94... I remember watching the series and Scottie Pippen getting that bad call against him. It's funny, because the author of the webpage brought it up as well. All in all, the Bulls played tough that year and had a legitimate shot at getting to the NBA finals, and that's without Jordan... No way they would have beaten Dream, but the point is that the Bulls team, sans Jordan, isn't nearly as bad as people make them out to be. In fact, they aren't bad at all. They're actually pretty good. Ted, would you agree that though the Bulls team without Jordan weren't a championship team, they were a very good team? Moreover, a Bulls team without Jordan, winning 55 games during the Golden Age of Basketball... taking the Knicks to the limit... without Jordan. That's impressive wouldn't you say? Would you say that that team was filled with scrubs, because that's what a lot of people think... And it's funny, because some of the same people who will say that the All-Time Bulls team had more talent than the All-Time Celtics team will turn around and say that Jordan had to carry the Bulls on his back because they weren't a good team without him. Edited September 30, 2006 by MaxFly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigted Posted September 30, 2006 Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 (edited) Really the best matchup would be the '90s dynasty Bulls against the '80s dynasty Lakers, the '80s dynasty Celtics, the '60s Celtics, the '60s Lakers, the teams that played together for a while, those would be classic battles but the Bulls'd most likely win since they already beat great Knicks teams, Sonic teams, Sun teams that had a core that played together for a while and woulda been dynasties in other eras, but the Lakers and Celtics really are overall better franchises though, I agree with you on that, they were a powerhouse for decades in basketball, the Bulls all time can't compete with that if you put it that way Edited September 30, 2006 by bigted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxFly Posted September 30, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 (edited) Really the best matchup would be the '90s dynasty Bulls against the '80s dynasty Lakers, the '80s dynasty Celtics, the '60s Celtics, the '60s Lakers, the teams that played together for a while, those would be classic battles but the Bulls'd most likely win since they already beat great Knicks teams, Sonic teams, Sun teams that had a core that played together for a while and woulda been dynasties in other eras, but the Lakers and Celtics really are overall better franchises though, I agree with you on that, they were a powerhouse for decades in basketball, the Bulls all time can't compete with that if you put it that way Again, this wasn't a matchup of dynasties. This poll had a specific purpose; to see which franchise had the All-Time best team and had the most talent. The scenario was that each team had it's best players in their primes when on that team from all generations thrown together to play in a playoff type series. The poll was who would win... the final was Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Charles Oakley, Horace Grant, Dennis Rodman, Toni Kukoc, Steve Kerr, Ben Gordon, Tyson Chandler and others vs. Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Shaquille O'Neal, Magic Johnson, Elgin Baylor, James Worthy, Jerry West, Kobe Bryant, Michael Cooper and others... The Bulls won the poll... convince me that the Bulls winning this was rational and makes sense... because it looks like hype to me. It reeks of Jordan and Bulls hype. And let me add this... if people would hype the Bulls team so much so that they would win something like this when it's obvious that the Celtics and the Lakers should be battling it out, what won't they hype about the Bulls team and Jordan? I have not problem with people saying that Jordan is the goat. I actually think that he is the goat, but I also think that he was good enough to let his accomplishments stand for themselves. I'm not going to resort to weak arguments about him having to carry the Bulls, or having to put down the accomplishments of other players to prop him up. I think that people can be fans without being irrational, know what I mean? But right now, there's little of that, because all the kids that are coming up only know about Jordan. Most don't know about Oscar Robertson and some of the great players of the past. It's a shame... Edited September 30, 2006 by MaxFly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian Posted September 30, 2006 Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 The Bulls won the poll... convince me that the Bulls winning this was rational and makes sense... because it looks like hype to me. It reeks of Jordan and Bulls hype. Jordan could win a game as an one player, he against the whole team:) I heard that people belevied into this. So Jordan is count as an another whole team:) It's simply mathematic: 14 > 9 ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Posted September 30, 2006 Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 thats Ditka ya moron....:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigted Posted September 30, 2006 Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 (edited) Well yeah I don't think our generation appreciates the history of the NBA, a lot of them who voted were probably kids who don't history of the NBA,the true basketball fans know that the Lakers and Celtics have a stronger franchise history than the Bulls do, a lot more hall of famers played for the Lakers and Celtics, they've been the mecca of basketball, and btw over the recent years I don't really find the NBA to be as competitive as it was 10-15 years ago but it's starting to get back there again, last year's playoffs was probably the most competitive that I've seen since the '90s Edited September 30, 2006 by bigted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxFly Posted September 30, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 Well yeah I don't think our generation appreciates the history of the NBA, a lot of them who voted were probably kids who don't history of the NBA,the true basketball fans know that the Lakers and Celtics have a stronger franchise history than the Bulls do, a lot more hall of famers played for the Lakers and Celtics, they've been the mecca of basketball, and btw over the recent years I don't really find the NBA to be as competitive as it was 10-15 years ago but it's starting to get back there again, last year's playoffs was probably the most competitive that I've seen since the '90s I agree. I always hear people say that things used to be better back in the day, and then when I question them on it further, it generally turns out that it's something they've heard other people say and that it sounds right. The NBA doesn't seem as strong as it did back in the day because it isn't as competitive. There are only a few teams that have a shot at the NBA championship... San Anotonio, Dallas, Miami, Phoenix... I don't think Detroit has a shot, and the Bulls are probably still one year away from really being a threat... Now that Houston has Bonzi Wells, they have a shot... But that's it... Most of the good teams are concentrated in the west, and the eastern conference teams really can't contend as well. There also used to be fierce rivalries. Knicks vs. Bulls, Knicks vs. Heat, Knicks vs. Pacers, Pacers vs. Bulls Out West, it was Seattle vs. Houston vs. Utah... Last year, it was Miami vs Detroit out east... no one took the Pacers seriously San Antonio vs. Dallas out west... no one takes Phoenix seriously The illusion that things were harder and basketball was better came from the fierce rivalries and the beat-em-up defense... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigted Posted October 1, 2006 Report Share Posted October 1, 2006 (edited) Yeah that's kind of sad that there's only a handful of teams with a shot of winning a championship, the Spurs and Heat might be questionable contenders though 'cause Tim Duncan and Shaq are starting to age now, btw speaking of the '90s Bulls, Toni Kukoc was recently the last member of those teams to retire, he was a decent shooter, made that big shot against the Knicks in '94 playoffs Edited October 1, 2006 by bigted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxFly Posted October 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 1, 2006 Yeah that's kind of sad that there's only a handful of teams with a shot of winning a championship, the Spurs and Heat might be questionable contenders though 'cause Tim Duncan and Shaq are starting to age now, btw speaking of the '90s Bulls, Toni Kukoc was recently the last member of those teams to retire, he was a decent shooter, made that big shot against the Knicks in '94 playoffs I think people are counting out Tim Duncan. He was injured all last year; played with plantar faciitis, but he played fantastic basketball againt the Mavs in the playoffs... it's just that his supporting cast didn't step up... Even with all that, the Spurs set a franchise record for wins last year. Now Tim Duncan is healthy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcpbball30 Posted October 1, 2006 Report Share Posted October 1, 2006 Yeah, Duncan played amazing in the playoffs when he was injured, he is a great player, and I expect him to keep on dominating this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.