# Jordan Bulls Vs. Lakers



## double3peat (Aug 18, 2003)

Who do you guys think would have won between the then Bulls vs. the now Lakers?

Luc Longely Vs. Shaq- Advantage Lakers
Dennis rodman Vs. Karl Malone- Even
Pipper Vs. George- Advantage Bulls
Jordan Vs. Kobe- Advantage Bulls
Harper? Vs. Payton- Advantage Lakers
Coach- Same
Bench- not sure but i think even
Intangibles- Shaq's dominance gives this to LA
Overall- I think Lakers would take them.

We probably won't break their winning record butt hat's ebcause we're in the west. What doo you guys think?


----------



## JYD (Sep 3, 2002)

I'm going with the Lakers. I think the Bulls would probably be deeper with Kokoc off the bench, but Shaq is Shaq.


----------



## vickdaquick (Aug 12, 2003)

BULLZ

pg: lakers
sg: bulls
sf: bulls
pf: bulls
c : lakers

bench: BULLS

advantage : BULLZ


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

C) Shaq slaughters Longley
PF) Rodman annoys the hell out of Rodman, but Malone still wins this match-up
SF) Pippen mops the floor with George.
SG) Jordan's a bit too much for Kobe
PG) GP. No contest.

The Bulls were great but they never faced anything like this. Lakers take this one.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot. The bench) advantage Bulls, no doubt.

Coach - Two PJ's cancel each other out.

Even with the bench advantage from the Bulls, Lakers still win. Barely.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

How can you give the Bulls bench an advantage? Look at the names outside of Kukoc- Kerr, Wennington, Burrell, Buechler... those guys are no better than Mark Madsen.


----------



## MrWonderful (May 18, 2003)

*You must be joking!*

Last year's lakers weren't much. This year kobe's got rape accusation problems on his mind and they've added a couple of once great but now old players. 

Sorry, but you're comparing a proven dominating force (the Jordan Bulls) with a patchwork solution to a lackluster team (last year's lakers). Let's compare them at the end of this season, not now.

A better comparo would have been one of the great 80's era laker teams.

cheers!


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jemel Irief</b>!
> How can you give the Bulls bench an advantage? Look at the names outside of Kukoc- Kerr, Wennington, Burrell, Buechler... those guys are no better than Mark Madsen.


Come on, Jemel, ANYONE'S better than Madsen.:laugh: Even Jud "The Stud" Buechler and Scott Burrell.


----------



## Laker4peat (Aug 30, 2003)

Lakers all the way. The Bulls cant hold Shaq. You reckon the Bulls mickey mouse frontcourt of longley Rodman can hold Shaq and Malone??? That frontcourt is going to destroy teams, just destroy them. Pippens going to have recurring migranes taking it to the hoops vs this Laker frontcourt. Kobe can match Jordans production. Jordans smarter and wins the matchup by experience but Kobes not going to back down and hes going to get his.

Bench production is a close Laker win. I want enforcer Fox on the bench instead of softie Toni Kukoc. Fisher is about as reliable as Kerr now as a sharpshooter. The rest the Lakers got more talent with K Rush, Medved, Horace compared to the Bulls scrubs like Jud Buechler. 

The competition now is better then what the Bulls got. Those Knicks teams and Heats teams sucked. The west was nothing like its now. Lakers in 5.


----------



## JYD (Sep 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Laker4peat</b>!
> The competition now is better then what the Bulls got. Those Knicks teams and Heats teams sucked. The west was nothing like its now. Lakers in 5.


I didn't think those Knicks were so bad.

C Patrick Ewing__Marcus Camby__Chris Dudley__Ben Davis
F Larry Johnson__Kurt Thomas__Buck Williams__Herb Williams
F Latrell Sprewell__David Wingate__Mirsad Turkan
G Allan Houston__Dennis Scott__Rick Brunson
G Charlie Ward__Chris Childs

Sure the Bulls and Lakers are still better but Ewing, Johnson, Sprewell, Houston, and Camby were a good team.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

For those of you who typically frequent the "greatest team ever" threads, you may or may not remember that I have maintained all along that the current Lakers do not deserve mention among the all-time great teams until they significantly improve their supporting cast. With GP and Malone now in the fold, I think it's now time to begin the comparisons. 

Just a side note- DaBullz, one of the Bulls mods, in an unrelated thread on the Bulls forum, likened the Bulls addition of Rodman and Harper to Jordan and Pippen to adding Rip Hamilton and Ben Wallace to Kobe and Shaq, and to me that seems pretty accurate. Are Rip and Ben>GP and Malone? I'll let you decide.

*PG -Payton vs. Harper* 
In alot of ways, these guys are similar- both are oversized at their position and are superb defenders, both joined winning teams at a point in their careers when they were/are only a season or two removed from all-star level play. In their respective primes, Harp was never the all-around player that GP was. However, keep in mind that Harper still averaged 20 ppg in 93-94- he was still very capable of being a big-time scorer by 95-96, but he sacrificed his scoring for the team in a big way and became a defensive specialist. He caused matchup nightmares for opposing pgs because of his size (6'6, 215) and defensive ability. I compared him to Rip Hamilton, but Harp was much stronger that Rip, and was a better overall player in his prime. Payton is a little smaller, but an amazing defender, still oversized at 6'4, and a much better natural pg than Harp. It is questionable as to how much the Lakers will need GP's "natural pg skills", as there is really no need for a true pg in the triangle, but a great player is a great player.

*SG- Jordan vs. Kobe* 
This is one comparison that I don't really need to go into detail with, as it has been done to death already. Kobe is a great, great player, but I think that even the most die-hard Kobe enthusiast should realize that Jordan in 95-96 was better than Kobe now. This was the Jordan that was playing on fresh legs from his two year absence, but had still spent the previous offseason working out with a monomaniacal zeal to get back to his dominance. Not much debate here, IMO- feel free to disagree.

*SF-Pippen vs. Fox/Walton* 
Well, Walton is good at passing and Fox has great hair, so let's see, uhhh......................PIPPEN BY A LANDSLIDE!!!!!:laugh:  

*C- Shaq vs. Longley* 
Again, pretty much a no-brainer. Longley always did a pretty good job on Shaq- alot of people forget just how big he was (7'2, 294). Even still, doing a "pretty good job" on Shaq, when he's motivated and in shape, is limiting him to 30 and 10- there's just no stopping him, no matter how you look at it. The Bulls of old used to use the hack-a-shaq technique with the "three-headed monster" of Longley, Bill Wennington, and the late Brian Williams, but Shaq has improved his FT shooting to the point where that approach will not be effective as it once was.

*PF-Malone vs. Rodman* 
I saved this matchup for last because I think it is the most interesting. Earlier i mentioned the Rodman-Ben Wallace comparison, and that seems pretty accurate- both 6'9, both very strong and athletic, both much better defenders and rebounders than scorers. Ben was a better shot-blocker, but Rodman was a better rebounder (16 rpg compared to the 14.3 that Ben averaged last season). Malone, though he is not as good a scorer as his 20 ppg suggests (the fact that he played in the Utah system last season very much inflated his ppg, IMO), is still a much better scorer and passer. At this point in his career, however, he is only a shadow of the rebounder Rodman was. Malone averaged 7.3 rpg last season. It'll be interesting to see how well he fits alongside a guy like Shaq.

*Bench* 
The Lakers bench will be significatly improved, but the Bulls had 6th man of the year Toni Kukoc (13.1 ppg), as well as Steve Kerr, Jud Buechler and Bill Wennington, who were all decent. Not much comparison here, IMO. 

This will be a hell of a season to watch. I do think that this Laker team has a chance to approach 70 wins- it's all about how well Phil handles all these egos (which is what he's best at anyways).


----------



## double3peat (Aug 18, 2003)

> The Lakers bench will be significatly improved, but the Bulls had 6th man of the year Toni Kukoc (13.1 ppg), as well as Steve Kerr, Jud Buechler and Bill Wennington, who were all decent. Not much comparison here, IMO.


I agree with most everything you said exccept this. I think the Lakers bench is pretty underrated. If we have Fox or George playing SF then we ahve the second one on the bench, both of which are good role player IMO especially off the bench. Then we have D.Fisher coming off the bench behing Payton and he's shown himself to be a solid role player as well. Slava and Ho-Grant make decent relief players for Shaq/Karl. I'm not going to argue for Rush/Pargo but by their summer league play they look to be promising benchers too. I still hold that the benches are even if not slightly in LA's favor.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Since we are doing these position by position anaylsis to determine which team is better (which is ineffective, IMO) look at the benches-

PG- Fisher vs Brown- No comparison here. Fisher is a former 3rd option for a championship ball club. FISHER BY A SHAQ/LONGELY LANDSLIDE!!!

SG- Rush vs Kerr- No doubt Rush is the more talented player, but he has yet to earn Phils confidence. When he does this won't be up for the debate since he will be the go-to guy of the second unit.

SF- Kukoc vs Fox- Kukoc was a match-up nightmare and Phil started him at all 5 positions. Truly one of the best bench players of his era.

PF- Cook/Slava/Walton vs Caffey- Not sure which one will earn the job yet, but this one is close. The 3 Lakers are basically offensive players while Caffey was the Bulls only physical presence in the front court off the bench.

C- Grant vs Beef Willington- All Bill was good for was open jumpers. Ho gives you that plus superior one-on-one defense.

I don't know if you are too young to remember them Louie but the Bulls bench of the first championship teams with Hodges, Paxson, Perdue, Scott Williams and Levingston was much better.


----------



## max6216 (Nov 27, 2002)

bulls in 6. i can't see the refs saving the lakers against the bulls like they did in game 6.also chicago would not have missed the freethrows that sac did in game7.and i know the bulls would not have blown the lead portland did in the 4th qt. and besides to call kerr a scrub isn't right look what he did in last yrs playoffs.


----------



## realbullsfaninLA (Jan 8, 2003)

Despite Shaq's dominance in the paint,I still give the Bulls the advantage.The Bulls would press and make it difficult for Shaq to even get the ball.

To me,the Lakers would have been better served never trading VanExcel,Jones and Campbell.Now THOSE players coached by Phil Jackson,in addition to Shaq and Kobe could have been a dynasty.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

Shaq would be the only laker advantage, and even thats not enough to overcome all the Bulls advantages. Jordan and Pippen would contain Kobe very nicely. Rodman would make sure Shaq only got one shot at the basket by rebounding. Longley and Wennington would 'try' to keep Shaq from dunking on them and do what most mediocre centers with size do on shaq, and take charges. Kukoc would cause so many matchup problems, Jordan and Pippen could penetrate and kick out to kerr or kukoc for the 3ball. Since Jordan and Pippen both have GREAT midrange jumpers they could pull up before even getting to shaq under the hoop. 

To me its not even close, I think it would be a better comparison to put the Lakers of this era against the 94-95 Rockets. That would be a good matchup.


----------



## slluB (Apr 25, 2003)

remember guys dont match these players by position. i think phil would use pippen on payton, like he did w/indiana and mark jackson, since payton is more of an offensive threat, leaving harper on fox or george because they arent offensive threats. just something to think about.


----------



## O2K (Nov 19, 2002)

its hard considering that we dont know how the lakers will play together, obviously there will be some chemistry problems with the lakers but ill give it a shot.

Point Guard: like the above poster mentioned pippen would guard payton on this one, i hate to compare these two but at the time pippen was a complete player, he could match payton defensively and offensively, and you cant forget about pippens height advantage, payton is probably a tad bit quick but pippen has those long arms, i would love to say pippen but im going to call it even.

Shooting Guard: Kobe is young, kobe is almost a duplicate of jordan but like the saying goes "often imitated never duplicated", this one goes to jordan.

Small Foward: i believe kukoc would be the one getting the minutes over harper, just because of the size differential and the matchups. Kukoc as a backup would still be more of a plus than george. this one goes to the bulls as well.

Power Fowards: how we have forgotten the 97 and 98 finals when rodman played malone just as great as anyone else can. He got to malones head, he even provided some good offense. This one would be even but its a slight edge to the lakers.

Centers: shaq.

bench: i would call it even, with harper comming off the bench the bench for the bulls is slightly weaker but still strong seeing as the lakers defense off the bench could be weak (we have yet to see), and we all know how fisher defends the point guards off picks. This is also even.

What it comes down to: i think it would come down to basketball iq and the bulls would dominate any team when it comes to how the game is played and how to take advantage of every matchup. Rodman, Jordan, and Pippen had an abundance of iq, even tho payton and malone are very smart players, i think the bulls take this one and would win the game by about 10


----------



## hOnDo (Jun 26, 2002)

Lakers would win. Shaq is just too much. Kobe would want to rip his idol MJ.


----------



## double3peat (Aug 18, 2003)

I'm sorry but the more i think about it the more I think LA would win. I mean for those of you who think Rodman could defend Shaq(to which i HIGHLY disagree) you leave some scrub guarding Malone, who is very soncistent with an open mid range jumper. Next, I'm not saying that Kobe is in anywyaz better then Jordna but I will confidently say he is a class above any shooting guard Jordan ever had to face. IT would eba rgeta matchup to watch. Now if we think about it Bulls ahd to win in 6 to beat the Jazz. If we compare those Jazz tot hese Lakers, you replace Stoockton with a slightly better version in Payton(Payton plays better D and will average MAD assists this year). You make MAloen a little worse. Your eplace Ostertag w/ Shaq and Hornecack with Kobe. I mean if that team could take 2 games from the Bulls, I'm pretty sure this LA team could take 4.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>double3peat</b>!
> I'm sorry but the more i think about it the more I think LA would win. I mean for those of you who think Rodman could defend Shaq(to which i HIGHLY disagree) you leave some scrub guarding Malone, who is very soncistent with an open mid range jumper. Next, I'm not saying that Kobe is in anywyaz better then Jordna but I will confidently say he is a class above any shooting guard Jordan ever had to face. IT would eba rgeta matchup to watch. Now if we think about it Bulls ahd to win in 6 to beat the Jazz. If we compare those Jazz tot hese Lakers, you replace Stoockton with a slightly better version in Payton(Payton plays better D and will average MAD assists this year). You make MAloen a little worse. Your eplace Ostertag w/ Shaq and Hornecack with Kobe. I mean if that team could take 2 games from the Bulls, I'm pretty sure this LA team could take 4.


Malone a "little" worse? What about Russell? Payton now is better than Stockton was then? Whoa thats so untrue. What about the chemistry between Malone, Stockton and the rest of the Jazz? 

If the Lakers team chemistry is as good as the Jazz or Bulls was at that time, then they will be the better team. But chemistry like that is not built overnight, Stockton and Malone built it over MANY MANY years. Jordan and Pippen built it over a few years plus. People overlook that too many times.

If the Jazz of 96 played the Lakers of 03, I'd put my money on the Jazz. You cant just fill in spots on paper with a more talented player and expect it to work as a team.


----------



## realbullsfaninLA (Jan 8, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> 
> 
> Malone a "little" worse? What about Russell? Payton now is better than Stockton was then? Whoa thats so untrue. What about the chemistry between Malone, Stockton and the rest of the Jazz?
> ...


Good post!:yes: Out of all the Bulls championships,the Suns,Trailblazers,and Jazz of 98 were favored to win.Come to think of it,the 91 Lakers were also favored.


----------



## double3peat (Aug 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>realbullsfaninLA</b>!
> 
> 
> Good post!:yes: Out of all the Bulls championships,the Suns,Trailblazers,and Jazz of 98 were favored to win.Come to think of it,the 91 Lakers were also favored.


Umm....the Jordan was the favorite to win every single eyar before the team that he'd play was decided, what are you talking about?


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> Lakers all the way. The Bulls cant hold Shaq. You reckon the Bulls mickey mouse frontcourt of longley Rodman can hold Shaq and Malone??? That frontcourt is going to destroy teams, just destroy them. Pippens going to have recurring migranes taking it to the hoops vs this Laker frontcourt. Kobe can match Jordans production. Jordans smarter and wins the matchup by experience but Kobes not going to back down and hes going to get his.
> 
> Bench production is a close Laker win. I want enforcer Fox on the bench instead of softie Toni Kukoc. Fisher is about as reliable as Kerr now as a sharpshooter. The rest the Lakers got more talent with K Rush, Medved, Horace compared to the Bulls scrubs like Jud Buechler.
> 
> The competition now is better then what the Bulls got. Those Knicks teams and Heats teams sucked. The west was nothing like its now. Lakers in 5.


Wow. No offense man, but I hope you realize how blinded by homerism you sound here. 
Lakers in 5?!?:laugh: 

I'd like to point out a couple of gross inacuracies in this post:

Gross inacuracy #1- You referred to Rodman and Longley as a "Mickey Mouse frontcourt", which, with all due respect, is laughable. Rodman was arguably the greatest rebounding/defensive PF ever, and was also a master of mind games. He did a better job on Shaq during the 95-96 playoffs than almost anyone I've ever seen- really got into his head. Either way, he certainly wins the matchup against Malone at this point. Nowadays, the only thing Malone really does well is hit that 15-ft. jumpshot- he is a below-average rebounder for a PF and doesn't really score in the post anymore. Honestly, if he had been on any team other than the Jazz last season (where he was the main option in the league's most well-run offense), he wouldn't have been anywhere near 20 ppg. That's something a lot of fans will discover this season.

Gross inacuracy #2- You wrote off Pippen as a factor in this series because of the "recurring migraines" that he will apparrently suffer for some reason while going to the basket against a team with *no great shotblockers* and featuring one of the league's oldest, slowest, shortest and least athletic starting PFs. I'm not even going to touch that one.

Gross inacuracy #3- "Kobe can match Jordan's production"?!? No disrespect to Kobe, but he is certainly not on the level of the 95-96 version of Jordan. Remember how badly Jordan spanked Clyde Drexler in the 1992 Finals? It won't be that bad, but Kobe is not significantly better than Drexler was in his prime (although he will go down as a much better player when all is said and done). Kobe's a better shooter and a more complete offensive player, but Clyde actually was stronger and more athletic, and provided a very tough matchup for opposing defenders.

Gross inacuracy #4- "I want enforcer Fox on the bench instead of softie Toni Kukoc"?!? First off, the fact that you refer to Rick Fox- that's _Rick Fox,_ people!- as an "enforcer"......well, it gave me a little chuckle. And yes, Kukoc is and was soft, but no matter how you figure it he was still *twice* the player Rick Fox is, and was significantly better than anyone the Lakers have coming off their bench.

I honestly find it hard to believe that anybody is trying to argue that the Lakers have a better or even as good of a bench as the Bulls of that era. Kukoc easily trumps anyone on the Lakers bench, and I would take Kerr over Fisher in a heartbeat. "But Fisher was the third option on three championship teams!", cry the Laker fans. First off, Fisher only became the third option by default because the supporting cast of those three championship teams was so weak. He has never been more than a small spot-up shooter who gives solid effort on defense but is far from what you would call a "good defender". So if I'm gonna have a guy like that on my team, I might as well go for the small spot-up shooter who happens to be the greatest 3-point shooter of all time (percentage-wise). Kerr was never more than the 5th offensive option for the Bulls, but the 8.4 ppg he put up in 95-96 is not far from the 10.5 ppg that Fisher put up last season as a 3rd option, and Kerr did it at a much higher clip. I realize that last year wasn't Fisher's best shooting season, but even in his best shooting season he only shot 41% from 3-point land. Compare that to the ridiculous 51.5% that Kerr shot from 3-point range in 95-96.

Gross inacuracy #.......ahh who cares! 
"The rest the Lakers got more talent with K Rush, Medved, Horace compared to the Bulls scrubs like Jud Buechler. "
KRush, Medved and Horace are just about the definition of the word "scrubs" themselves.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> Umm....the Jordan was the favorite to win every single eyar before the team that he'd play was decided, what are you talking about?


Not true. The Suns, especially, were heavily favored to beat the Bulls in 1992-93, as they had a much better season record (and thus home-court advantage) and featured Charles Barkley in the best season of his career. I don't really remember Portland being favored over Chicago, but I do seem to remember a number of "experts" picking Utah to beat Chicago in 1998. In fact, before the 1996-97 season, Sport Illustrated picked Seattle to beat the Bulls in the Finals. Seattle lost to Denver in the 1st round in one of the biggest upsets in playoff history, and Chicago went on to beat Utah in 6. Good call SI!


----------



## Basketball Fan (Sep 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Louie</b>!
> 
> Not true. The Suns, especially, were heavily favored to beat the Bulls in 1992-93, as they had a much better season record (and thus home-court advantage) and featured Charles Barkley in the best season of his career. I don't really remember Portland being favored over Chicago, but I do seem to remember a number of "experts" picking Utah to beat Chicago in 1998. In fact, before the 1996-97 season, Sport Illustrated picked Seattle to beat the Bulls in the Finals. Seattle lost to Denver in the 1st round in one of the biggest upsets in playoff history, and Chicago went on to beat Utah in 6. Good call SI!


I thought that Seattle/Denver upset was in 1994?


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> I thought that Seattle/Denver upset was in 1994?


I could've sworn that it happened in 96-97, but i could be wrong. Either way, Seattle didn't make it back to the Finals in 96-97.


----------



## Ben1 (May 20, 2003)

Lakers vs Bulls will be one tight game. 


I'll give Bulls the nod here, esp since we haven't see jsut how the "new" Lakers will play on the court yet.


----------



## JYD (Sep 3, 2002)

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the Sonics lost to the Bulls in the Finals in the 95-96 season.

2003 Spurs/ Nets
2002 Lakers/ Nets
2001 Lakers/ 76ers
2000 Lakers/ Pacers
1999 Spurs/ Knicks
1998 Jazz/ Bulls
1997 Jazz/ Bulls
1996 Sonics/ Bulls
1995 Rockets/ Magic
1994 Rockets/ Knicks
1993 Suns/ Bulls
1992 Blazers/ Bulls
1991 Lakers/ Bulls

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketba/skn/sknd020.htm


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> Yeah, I'm pretty sure the Sonics lost to the Bulls in the Finals in the 95-96 season.


The question was whether they got eliminated by Denver in the first round in the 94 playoffs or the 97 playoffs.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

They lost to Denver in 94. It was also the year they won the most games in the league with 63.

In the 97 playoffs they lost in the semis to Houston.


----------



## Laker4peat (Aug 30, 2003)

This Lakers team has the firepower to destroy the Bulls if things click. Shaq is as dominant as his position as Jordan was back then. Then you take the big man. Big men win games. Olajuwon did it with CBA scrubs as teammates. Duncan did it by himself and the refs. Nobody is bigger then Shaq. Shaq is better then Jordan, Jordan is overrated. Hes a great 2. Not the greatest player of all time. He had 6 titles in a weakened NBA. Good stuff, but his legend is a product of hype. 

The supporting cast isnt even in the same league. Kobe, Malone, GP would destroy Pippen and Rodman. 

That is a mickey mouse frontcourt. Longley and Rodman is a joke compared to Malone and Shaq. You got maybe the greatest frontcourt in NBA history vs 2 role players. Thats not even a comparison man.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Laker4peat</b>!
> Duncan did it by himself *and the refs.*


:laugh: Even when you give Duncan credit your criticizing him...and Shaq didn't have any help from the refs in the years he dominated? If you say no that cements your bias, if it hasnt been cemented already. I dont even care to comment on the rest of your post because I've come to expect it from you. 

But some of you (not just Lakers4peat) need to step away from the NBA Live and watch real basketball, you have no clue as to what wins games in REAL LIFE.


----------



## luciano (Aug 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Laker4peat</b>!
> Duncan did it by himself and the refs.


 Lakers honestly can't complain about refs..........



> Even when you give Duncan credit your criticizing him...and Shaq didn't have any help from the refs in the years he dominated? If you say no that cements your bias, if it hasnt been cemented already. I dont even care to comment on the rest of your post because I've come to expect it from you.


bingo


----------



## luciano (Aug 16, 2002)

I couldn't pick this matchup. 

Chicago was amazing and this year's Lakers team will be too.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> I dont even care to comment on the rest of your post because I've come to expect it from you.


I'll second that.:yes: 

It's the same guy that thinks Devean George is a future all-star, so you have to take it with a grain of salt.


----------



## DaBobZ (Sep 22, 2003)

I'll go for MJ's Bulls, It'll be very hard for the Lakers to beat the 70 wins mark.
Their bench is nothing compared to the Bulls late 90's.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Laker4peat</b>!
> Nobody is bigger then Shaq. Shaq is better then Jordan, Jordan is overrated. Hes a great 2. Not the greatest player of all time. He had 6 titles in a weakened NBA. Good stuff, but his legend is a product of hype.


Jordan won 6 titles in a weakened NBA? What the hell do you call this? We're not exactly in the Golden Age of basketball right now. The 80's were the Golden Age. I think MJ's 6 titles came in the second best era in the history of the NBA. The league today is a freaking joke. When one-dimensional teams like Sacramento and Dallas are considered elite then you know something is wrong. This era is a joke and Shaq still only has 3 titles. If he was so much better than Jordan then why wasn't he winning titles in the early and mid 90's? Shaq is a phenomenal player but look at who he competes against night in and night out. Divac is a top 5 C? Ilgaskus is a top 5 C? Miller is a top 5 C? What a joke! None of those guys would be top 10 10 years ago and some wouldn't be top 15. The Lakers would put up a fight against the Bulls but I doubt they'd win and they sure as hell wouldn't dominate them.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*Lol*

Lol the Lakers have the worst bench by far of the good teams. Rush and Pargo are very inconsitent. To say that they are good is rediculous. Fisher can't pass nor can he score. Fox is a pretty boy who doesnt care much about Basketball anymore. If he could act with any decency he would be gone already. Can we say dropped pass against the sixers? Slava is just horrible. Luke and Cook dont know the triangle.... and theres a reason Luke was picked in the late second round... Also, u underestimate Kerr. He has the NBA record for 3 point %. Not many people know that. Kukoc was 6'th man of the year. Bulls had a great bench as well as a great starting lineup. Jordan is overpowering and is much better than any single player on the Lakers. Malone i dont see fitting in with Shaq. Malone had one of the highest shots per game in the Nba. now they want him to take around 12 shots a game? Thats like half!! And Payton gets his job done on scoring. Hes a good scorer and a mediocre passer. And dont forget about the Kobe issue..... u know Rodman would eat Kobe up about that stuff..... Bulls all the way... and watch out for the Spurs and Kings... theyre on the rise.... and the Lakers are trying to mend a hole that theyve had forever... the Kings and Spurs are just adding... the Lakers are subsidizing...


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

I also agree with Pinball.... to say Jordan was a legend made off of hype is ridiculous. The center thing is also true... even though i like Vlade... There are no centers anymore... Weakened NBA? Barkely and Olajuwan and Drexler on the same team??? there was another person on that team but i cant think of his name. Malone and Stockton in their prime? Ewing in his prime? The Nba was not weakened....


----------



## double3peat (Aug 18, 2003)

> . Hes a good scorer and a mediocre passer


wow, that line alone has made both of your posts completely void. So say Payton is a mediocre passer(who just happened to be the second leading assistor in the league w/ 8.3 APG) is like saying Kobe is a mediocre scorer since he was the second elading scorer. LAst I checked second in the league was a little bit more the mediocre......


----------



## nalz (May 12, 2003)

Payton a mediocre passer? I pick Lakers...the difference between Shaq and any Bulls C's or PF's are just too much for the 90's Bulls to handle. Jordan wouldn't dominate Kobe, but Shaq will eat em up!


----------



## FBarley (Nov 10, 2002)

As soon as the Lakers win a championship with that team, I can make a choice. It looks like an incredible line-up, but actually doing something with it means something. It is the Bulls until the Lakers prove something.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Yes, a mediocre passer. Hes not known for his passing its his scoring. The reason his assists were so high before was because he IS the focus. Anyone thats a pg thats the star (and he was the star not casell) will have high assists because he gets double teamed and kicks out. You dont have to be a great passer to do that. Now that hes not the focus and hes the least one to worry about, his assists will go down. Especially since Kobe is gonna have the ball alot more.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

Maybe Payton is mediocre at passing compared to what he used to be, but hes certainly not mediocre at all in that regard. Hes a top 5 PG passer in the league, and probably top 10 overall for all positions at passing. Definitly not mediocre. 

People forget just how good Payton was in his prime, he was the idol of the best passer in the NBA right now, which should tell you something about him in itself.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Payton disapeared when he played the bulls in his prime. Maybe the sonics wouldn't have lost if Payton hadn't pulled a casper the ghost. I want to say Phil put Jordan on him, actually. Or Karl put Payton on Jordan. Either way Payton disapeared in that series.

And let us never again mention that nuggets upset of the sonics. That was the saddest day of my life as a sportsfan. I haven't watched sports with the same attatchment since. That sonics team broke my heart. They were the best team that year. And they started out that series by blowing out the nuggets...and then it's all Robert Pack this and Dikembe Mutombo that...damn.

Anyhow. We have that old bulls team playing against Payton and Malone when they were in their primes. Which they both are far removed from at this point. And in both series both guys didn't play very well. Rodman owns Karl Malone. And now Malone is so reliant on that 15 foot jumper... he is not going to get into the hall based on his laker play, lets just say that. I mean did anyone watch him on the jazz last year? Early in the year he was struggling mightily a lot of people were talking about the jazz being washed up. It seems like Karl struggles more and more with each year. And as a straight role player, the lakers were better off with Horace Grant of a few championships ago.(And just in case you didn't know, Ho-Grant IS a scrub at this point in his career. I can't believe anyone would point to him on the bench right now with anything resembling pride. He can barely walk, let alone play on those knees.)

And Kukoc would be the best guy on the lakers bench right now, if he were there.(I'm not talking about when Toni was with the bulls, I'm talking right now with the bucks, if he got traded to the lakers, he would be the lakers 6th man, and possibly start). And all of the Bulls role players were excellent in their roles. They all served a function. Even Jud Buechler. The lakers bench is still too young or too old at this point.

Pippen would decide this series just like he did in all the bulls championships.

I think the bulls would be fine with Shaq getting his. They've got enough inefficient white guys to throw at shaq and make him earn his points. But he'd still go for 30-40 if the lakers gave him the ball enough(which isn't something they've done lately, kobe likes to jack up bad shots).

anyhow. I think the bulls can overcome Shaq's contribution and would win it by at least 10, 9 times out of 10.

This team needs to win a championship before we can even have this conversation. Or even win more than 60 games. Forget about 72. I'd be suprised if the lakers care enough about the regular season to make a run at 72. I think they'll be content with just trying to get home court advantage. Their guys have never cared about the regular season before.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)




----------



## double3peat (Aug 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> Yes, a mediocre passer. Hes not known for his passing its his scoring. The reason his assists were so high before was because he IS the focus. Anyone thats a pg thats the star (and he was the star not casell) will have high assists because he gets double teamed and kicks out. You dont have to be a great passer to do that. Now that hes not the focus and hes the least one to worry about, his assists will go down. Especially since Kobe is gonna have the ball alot more.


!!!!!!

You are incredible. First of all Gary Paytons APG DROPPED after he got traded to Milawakee you ignoranus. Secondly after Kemp died he reall had no one to pass too in Sea and still kep his APG over 8. In LA he will have 3 amazing scoring optiosn to pass to, and as a result of which is APG will increase.


----------

