# Dream Team Documentary



## Headliner (Aug 11, 2011)

Anybody going to watch it? I can't wait. I haven't looked forward to a documentary like this in a while. Nostalgia at it's finest right here.


----------



## LA68 (Apr 3, 2004)

It should be great. The clips look good. I like the idea of truly great players stepping their game up even higher against each other. Younger players can learn from it.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

What time is it on? NBA tv right?


----------



## Headliner (Aug 11, 2011)

Think it's 9PM next wednesday. NBA TV.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

This is on in a few minutes for those interested.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

I'm going to tune in... hard to believe the Dream Team was 20 years ago. I was 10, and man was I all about the Dream Team... it was great checking the box scores (in the newspaper, youngsters...) and seeing the 70 point wins, etc...


----------



## 29380 (Feb 23, 2009)

Poor Toni Kukoc


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Damn it, missed it. Going to record a rerun.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

It should be on the netz or toob by tommorow


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

It was excellent


----------



## 29380 (Feb 23, 2009)

Online Exclusives


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Loved everything about the documentary. I was only 6-years-old when they played in the Olympics in 1992 and never watched any of the games. Would've been incredible to watch back then. 

Very fun insight into all the behind-the-scenes things that took place.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

I can now see why Isiah wasn't on the team. Dumb of him to not shake hands walking off the court in 91.

However, he CLAIMS Boston didn't shake their hands when the Pistons beat the Celtics, so..


----------



## TheAnswer (Jun 19, 2011)

Nice documentary. 

Lmao @ no one knowing John Stockton (especially the lady with the entire Dream Team on her shirt including John.)


----------



## gi0rdun (May 31, 2007)

What would a real modern day dream team look like? It should include guys like Duncan and Garnett since Bird and Magic were no longer in their prime years but still included.

Something like

Paul/Rose/Kidd
Kobe/Wade
James/Durant
Love/Garnett
Dwight/Duncan

With Anthony Davis in the Laettner role. Pretty much everyone is/will be Top 10 of all time at their position.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Wilbon was spot on at the very end of the documentary. Its an insult to compare any other team to them.

Awesome work, I still remember going out in my driveway after each of those games and acting out the game against invisible defenders.

Definitely one of the most influential moments in basketball history, if not professional sports history.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

The two best PGs ever (Magic and Stockton)
The best player and SG ever (Jordan)
Top 3 all-time PF (Malone)
Best SF/shooter ever (Bird)

Thats just listing the near best ever at each position. No team will ever come close to that in terms of talent or significance.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Jordan vs Magic during practice was a ****ing treat!! Hearing the trash talk was just awesome!


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Stockton not being noticed! Lmao!


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

If anyone has a link to the doc, please fire it my way.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Porn Player said:


> If anyone has a link to the doc, please fire it my way.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2Pm_5aIavU&feature=relmfu


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

With out name dropping.

The Dream Team was the most inspiring, and greatest team ever assembled. A team of worthy of credentials, all earned on the hardwood. A team with players chalk full of iconic playoff performances. With fists full of championship jewelry, and individual awards and glory. A team that had players that led across different eras and generations. A team comprised and built to function like a well oiled machine. The Dream Team will never be replicated, and no other team will ever have the cultural impact and dominance that lit the world on fire like the original Dream Team.


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

Superstar.


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

Great doc.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

People only say the Dream Team can't be compared because of how big a moment it was and the disparity between them and the competition. It was basically some updated George Mikan shit....

If you're talking just oncourt you could do it because you got players in the league right now that compare favorably and would all mix in with the dream team if you were ranking the top 24


----------



## LA68 (Apr 3, 2004)

Its not just on court. Sure you could find guys who run faster, jump higher and hit more shots. 

Its about that time in the evolution of sports, history and culture. The Soviet Union had collapsed and things opened up. That was the time to get in there and inject some American culture. 

Now, with the web everyone has seen everything. Nothing is new and exciting anymore.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

:kobe2:

"I know rapper XXX got shot and that's part of his hype, but he isn't that good"

"It's not about him being good it's about him getting shot"


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Dre said:


> :kobe2:
> 
> "I know rapper XXX got shot and that's part of his hype, but he isn't that good"
> 
> "It's not about him being good it's about him getting shot"


There is a time, and place for everything. A rapper like Tupac came to stardom when his voice and message would resonate with the world, and his battle and gangster persona he would grow into woul change the world, and tragically destroy his own. That kind of power and presence is lacking in the hip hop game now, and will never be duplicated. Things Pac rapped about have changed, some of the struggles Pac railed against, have finally made the positive turn, into better changes. Unfortunately Pac is not here to see it. And I bet you were to young to see the real essence and power of the original dream team, to understand the scope of their magnitude and force. 

So let's keep it no nonsense, and not try and rewrite history, instead appreciate it, and the beautiful things it's ushered into the world we live in. Especially when were talking about the legendary Pac, and the Greatest team ever Assembled in The Dream Team.

Respect.


----------



## Drizzy (Mar 23, 2012)

Man, watched the first 45 minutes then it hit 3AM so I had to sleep. Now I see the link has been removed...anyone have any others? Would love to see the rest.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

23AJ said:


> There is a time, and place for everything. A rapper like Tupac came to stardom when his voice and message would resonate with the world, and his battle and gangster persona he would grow into woul change the world, and tragically destroy his own. That kind of power and presence is lacking in the hip hop game now, and will never be duplicated. Things Pac rapped about have changed, some of the struggles Pac railed against, have finally made the positive turn, into better changes. Unfortunately Pac is not here to see it. And I bet you were to young to see the real essence and power of the original dream team, to understand the scope of their magnitude and force.
> 
> So let's keep it no nonsense, and not try and rewrite history, instead appreciate it, and the beautiful things it's ushered into the world we live in. Especially when were talking about the legendary Pac, and the Greatest team ever Assembled in The Dream Team.
> 
> Respect.


:dwill: Man none of that has anything to do with anything.

All I'm saying is oncourt you could probably get a comparable team together today, but the Dream Team will always have the edge because of their impact...and noone will entertain otherwise (and rightfully so)...

Sort of like how a lot of people a generation above me will probably never let anyone pass Jordan in their books. 

All that other stuff is irrelevant


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

you could not do that for one simple reason - brains inhabit bodies

and the marginal differences in the bodies in no way come close to making up for those brains

so sorry, but, no


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Are y'all doing mushrooms in this thread?


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

I'll go a step further. You could get a squad of guys today that would beat the Dream Team. Let's be honest some of those dudes were old and the players of today would present unique mismatches of speed and athleticism that would be hard to match up with.


----------



## ~Styles~ (May 1, 2006)

SSSHHHHHHHHHH you can't say that.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Coatesvillain said:


> I'll go a step further. You could get a squad of guys today that would beat the Dream Team. Let's be honest some of those dudes were old and the players of today would present unique mismatches of speed and athleticism that would be hard to match up with.


A bunch of international white dudes from Spain disagree, and point to the 2008 Olympics Gold Medal game. These guys are not super athlete, are just well balanced fundamental players. But you think the Dream Team would have problems with these teams, there is no team you can construct right now that would do shit to the Original Dream Team. 

For those who missed what I'm talking about ...


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Also let's not forget about Greece in 06.






Final score Greece 101 USA 95. 






I just don't see the original dream team have any trouble with spain or greece.


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

Fact is the Dream Team didn't have to play any international teams as good as the USA has played since. So we can't say whether they would've had trouble or not.

I just find it hard to believe that the Dream Team wouldn't struggle with the size and athleticism of today's best players. Lebron and KD on the floor together? Who is defending them using FIBA rules? Man.. listen.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

That was awesome. Great to see Barkley in his prime, I never really knew his personality until he started doing tv. Stockton not being recognized was also hilarious, he had to tell the lady who he was who was wearing a shirt with him on it hahah


----------



## AirJay (Aug 5, 2005)

Dream Team may have been given trouble but in the end they Jordan, Pippen, and Barkley in their primes. MJ carries them, look how weak the SG position is in the NBA right now.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

:favre:

Kobe and Wade are going to be the only 2s playing and he's not going to dog them. He's not running a gauntlet against all 30 starting 2s, just the ones that would be on the national team.

I know I'm saying this in a down period for Wade but still

This sounds bizarro to say but if that ever could happen in a paranormal universe you know he'd get Kobe's best effort because he's just competitive like that.

Plus you could sneak Paul Pierce on there at the 2.

So "in the end" my ass, because the margin between MJ and LeBron/Kobe is smaller than the accomplishments would lead you to believe. They're definitely _capable_ of outplaying him with their best effort. Not to sound like I'm ragging on Jordan because he's my GOAT, but people got him on this untouchable pedestal.

Let me ask this, has Jordan ever played another wing considered top 10 all-time in their primes? How good was Magic when they played? Drexler was great but firmly below him at that point.

The closest he's ever been challenged was prime Glove on him in those finals and he didn't have a flawless series by any stretch...and wasn't that the 72 win team


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Dre said:


> :favre:
> 
> Kobe and Wade are going to be the only 2s playing and he's not going to dog them. He's not running a gauntlet against all 30 starting 2s, just the ones that would be on the national team.
> 
> ...


QFT


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Coatesvillain said:


> I just find it hard to believe that the Dream Team wouldn't *struggle with the size and athleticism of today's best players*. Lebron and KD on the floor together? Who is defending them using FIBA rules? Man.. listen.


holy god, let me roll my eyes all the way back in my head - are you kidding?


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

You're saying that they wouldn't have problems with guys like Durant and LeBron on the wings? Is that what you're saying?


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Not sure who would check David Robinson. Even if he wasn't Hakeem or Shaq, he did still drop 71 points in a game to win a scoring title. Aside from that, I think the advantage is mostly with the new guys. Rose would destroy AIDS Magic so much.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Coatesvillain said:


> You're saying that they wouldn't have problems with guys like Durant and LeBron on the wings? Is that what you're saying?


what I'm saying is that a team with Scottie Pippen, Charles Barkley, Michael Jordan, Clyde Drexler, Karl Malone and David Robinson all in their primes is going to have just as much 'athleticism and size' as today's players


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

e-monk said:


> what I'm saying is that a team with Scottie Pippen, Charles Barkley, Michael Jordan, Clyde Drexler, Karl Malone and David Robinson all in their primes is going to have just as much 'athleticism and size' as today's players


Please, those guys were athletic and all, but Rose, LeBron, and Durant are combinations of speed, size, and athleticism that have never existed before in the game at their positions.


----------



## ~Styles~ (May 1, 2006)

Exactly...who would win is another arguement but 92 guys are not seeing the modern day players for straight athleticism.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Nimreitz said:


> Please, those guys were athletic and all, but Rose, LeBron, and Durant are combinations of speed, size, and athleticism that have never existed before in the game at their positions.


holy shit you really think that? 

Lebron is pretty singular I'll grant you that but I'd still take Mike over him as a player

and how is Durant all that athletic? he's tall and has great wing span but it's not like he's Dominique

and Rose? there's never been a 6'3" fast guy? could someone post the clip of KJ dunking on Hakeem for me here?


it never ceases to amaze me when people think that athleticism and speed are something that just got invented - the game was actually played faster and more fluidly back then


----------



## ~Styles~ (May 1, 2006)

Oh shit yeh forgot KJ and Dominique was in the Olympic squad, my bad.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> Please, those guys were athletic and all, but Rose, LeBron, and Durant are combinations of speed, size, and athleticism that have never existed before in the game at their positions.


Woah now... Karl Malone and David Robinson were huge and athletic... there isn't really anyone in the league now with Ewing's size and strength (D12 and Bynum, maybe)... Jordan was a freak... Even an aging Drexler was probably more athletic than Kevin Durant. I've seen Scottie Pippen dunk from the free throw line, cover PGs, cover PFs... 

As for whoever mentioned Rose running past "AIDS Magic" (who, incidentally didn't and doesn't have AIDS) the answer to that problem is Scottie Pippen. I love Derrick Rose... but Scottie could both run the point for the dream team and give Rose trouble on the defensive end. Stockton wasn't a terrible defender either, though I think Rose would overpower him. 

If anything I think the current players would have difficulty matching up with the size and strength of the '92 team. I certainly wouldn't call it an advantage for today's players, outside of Lebron who would pose some mismatch issues.


----------



## carrrnuttt (Dec 4, 2004)

Nimreitz said:


> Please, those guys were athletic and all, but Rose, LeBron, and Durant are combinations of speed, size, and athleticism that have never existed before in the game at their positions.


LOL

All three of those guys will likely never finish a season against the defenses Jordan played against. The weak-ass, offense-oriented rules of today have made these guys relative pussies in more ways than one.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

We need a ****ing time machine to be invented already. Add that to your to do list, Ballscientist.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Dre said:


> People only say the Dream Team can't be compared because of how big a moment it was and the disparity between them and the competition. It was basically some updated George Mikan shit....
> 
> If you're talking just oncourt you could do it *because you got players in the league right now that compare favorably* and would all mix in with the dream team if you were ranking the top 24


Eh, not so much.

As track and field athletes? Sure. But basketball also involves applying those physical attributes to basketball skill and fundamentals, competitive drive and clutch ability/closing. 

So who are these players?

For one, you don't have centers today who are as good as Robinson and Ewing. Dwight Howard is a 6'11" 285 lb. physical specimen who is stiff in the post, can't shoot outside of 3 feet and doesn't handle the ball well. Now, the position has deteriorated so badly that relatively speaking, he looks legendary. Ewing or Robinson would eat him alive. 

There are 6'8" PGs who run throw accurate 40 foot no look passes today and hit running jump hooks from 12 feet to win Finals games? 

And if you want to compare Lebron to Magic, okay, I get that. But then who are you comparing to Michael? Kobe? LOL. It's not 2000 anymore and you can't premise it by saying, "well, at age 22... if you compare them, I'd take Kobe." The problem is, Kobe turned 24, 26, 30, etc. and along the way shot 37% in a playoff loss to Detroit and I believe 38% in a loss to Boston, something Michael never would have done.

Durant v. Bird works out well for you. I like that one. As does Rose v. Stockton, but you have to remember that it was political back then and in today's era where everyone has the same marketing/corporate reps Isiah would probably play on the team. Shaq probably would as well. 

Who else? Tell me. I want you to say Carmelo so I can hyperventilate from laughter.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

*fart noises*


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Dre said:


> :favre:
> 
> Kobe and Wade are going to be the only 2s playing and he's not going to dog them. He's not running a gauntlet against all 30 starting 2s, just the ones that would be on the national team.
> 
> ...


Are you serious? 

To get Michael Jordan -

1. From Kobe?

a) Add Bill Russell's competitiveness
b) Add a first step much closer to Isiah Thomas' than Kobe Bryant's
c) Add Gary Payton's defense (if you've ever watched MJ from 87-93 you'll understand what I mean, and please don't talk about Pippen being the best defender on the team, because guess what, he'd be BY FAR the best defender on the team if he played with Bryant)
d) Add clutch shooting in the big moment closer to Jerry West or Larry Bird than Bryant

And still you're missing an ability to finish over contact in the paint that only MJ had.

2. From Lebron?

a) Add Bill Russell's competitiveness - twice
b) Lebron's first step is great, but add Isiah's ability to keep his dribble in traffic on the way to the rim with hands swiping
c) Add footspeed closer to Isiah Thomas
d) Add Larry Bird and Jerry West's clutch shooting and closing

And still you're missing an ability to finish over contact in the paint that only MJ had. And I'm not talking about squeezing layups in over the mild "contact" of today. I'm talking about getting hit by someone trying to knock you down and still dunking.

Indictments. Things that would have never happened in MJ's career:

1. Kobe
a) 2004 NBA Finals - Kobe shoots 37% in a loss to Detroit
b) 2008 NBA Finals - Kobe shoots 38% in a loss to Boston

2. Lebron
a) 2011 NBA Finals

As far as questioning Jordan's qualifications by questioning who he's played, remember you're not shooting on one side and putting your best shots up in a match of horse against the other guy. Someone is defending you.

Michael Cooper, Dennis Rodman, Joe Dumars, Dennis Johnson? Michael routinely made all look silly.

I know, hardly the defensive juggernauts that guarded James in the 2011 Finals. Kobe was held to 37% shooting v. Detroit in 2004. Let's see, Dennis Rodman or Joe Dumars defensively, or would I go with Rip Hamilton? 

And you are aware that Michael and Magic met many times before the 91 Finals right? Michael was routinely the best player on the floor v. Magic's Lakers even if Magic had the better team. 

Jordan's matchups v. Magic 

11/28/86 - 43 points, 10 rebounds only 4 trips to the FT line. The rest of the starting 5 is Charles Oakley, Steve Colter, Earl Cureton and Granville Waiters. Pretty funny when you consider Wade has a bad game 1 and the entire country (of Lebron apologists) throws Lebron a pity party for not having enough help. That starting 5 lost to Magic, Kareem et all by 7. 

2/2/88 - MJ has 39 on a TS% of 63.2%. Pippen and Grant are on the team but don't start. Mike Brown and Rory Sparrow DO start. They lose to the world champion Lakers by 9 whole points. 

Oh here's one for you

3/10/88 - MJ has 38 points, 9 rebounds, 7 assists, 3 steals, shoots 50% and gets his 38 points despite going to the line only 4 times. The starters are Jordan, Corzine, Oakley, Sellers and Vincent. The Bulls WIN 128-107. I am at the game as a 10 year old. 

12/20/88 - Pippen plays only 15 minutes and is not a starter yet. Bulls win 116-103. MJ has 42 points, 7 rebounds, 8 assists and 4 steals. You don't know what you're talking about. 

3/21/89 - Jordan doesn't have a great shooting night and only has 21 points. However, in this 104-103 win v. LA (that's right, MJ's Bulls swept the 89 Lakers and were 3-1 against the 88 and 89 Lakers), MJ also has 8 rebounds and 16 assists.

In Dwyane Wade's best day, Michael would eat him alive.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Dre said:


> *fart noises*


Yeah, because you sure don't have an argument. You're likely one of the "Kobe kids" who grew up on Bryant and now James after not seeing MJ pre-96. If you did, you probably never saw much 87-91 stuff. You're characterization of MJ probably has a lot to do with the time when he lost a step.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

I don't take you serious...probably shouldn't waste any more essays on stuff I won't read. And not in a cute "I won't even respond" type of fashion...like I did not read any of that sir.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Coatesvillain said:


> I'll go a step further. You could get a squad of guys today that would beat the Dream Team. Let's be honest some of those dudes were old and the players of today would present unique mismatches of speed and athleticism that would be hard to match up with.


You know I was hearing "the athletes in today's game are so much better than Jordan's days" in 2002.

You realize it's not track and field. Yes. If you didn't have to dribble or be accurate to hit a shot. If competitive drive and clutch play weren't a part of it, sure, you're right.

But basketball isn't track and field. How many dream teamers miss as many shots as Lebron James in the 2011 Finals? Do you think Larry Bird is shooting 37% against the 04 Pistons or 08 Celtics? Because Kobe did. 

Dwight Howard is 6'11" 285 with all-world athleticism. His stiffness in the post makes Alonzo Mourning look fluid.

And remember, if you were just picking the best PLAYERS back then, you'd have Shaq and Isiah on the team.

Who that can play at the same level is so much more athletic than Jordan, Shaq, Pippen, Isiah and Robinson?


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Coatesvillain said:


> Fact is the Dream Team didn't have to play any international teams as good as the USA has played since. So we can't say whether they would've had trouble or not.
> 
> I just find it hard to believe that the Dream Team wouldn't struggle with the size and athleticism of today's best players. Lebron and KD on the floor together? Who is defending them using FIBA rules? Man.. listen.


Yeah you can! Oh my god. I'm literally going to bang my head against a wall. 

Go watch Magic, Michael and Larry in the Finals. Then, go watch Lebron in the Finals and Kobe in some of the Finals he played in and tell me that the same problems would exist. 

The league is diluted and with early entry into the NBA draft, you have better athletes not getting the kind of fundamentals from great college coaches that guys like MJ and Isiah came into the game with. 3-4 years of drills with great coaches matters. It's why Kareem could hit a hook shot from 12 feet and Dwight Howard can't hit one from 4.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Nimreitz said:


> Please, those guys were athletic and all, but Rose, LeBron, and Durant are combinations of speed, size, and athleticism that have never existed before in the game at their positions.


But basketball is a combination of speed, size and athleticism applied to skills and fundamentals. Eddie Robinson was a better athlete than Kobe. He couldn't shoot or handle the ball at a college level. 

Howard can't hit a hook shot. Lebron can't keep his dribble after he puts the first defender behind him and plays like crap in the clutch relative to those guys. Kobe is a great leaper but actually doesn't have anything close to the first step MJ had.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Dre said:


> I don't take you serious...probably shouldn't waste any more essays on stuff I won't read. And not in a cute "I won't even respond" type of fashion...like I did not read any of that sir.


But anyone else who did read it knows your hyperbole got destroyed with actual argument.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Kobe and LeBron aren't touching Jordan but they are *significantly* better than any wing that Jordan faced in the 90's. And it's not even debatable.

Oh, and Pippen was the best defender on those Bulls teams. Jordan is on the short list for best perimeter defender ever, but that list probably starts with Scottie.

And Dwight isn't Kareem or anything but he's sure as hell not that far off from Robinson and Ewing. Especially Ewing. And he's already better than Alonzo. People like to shit on him because his competition is wack or because he isn't smooth in the post, but he's on the short list for one of the best defenders ever, he's a tenacious rebounder, and for all of his offensive shortcomings he still easily gets his 20 a night on 60% despite *never* playing with a great playmaker. Give him someone better than Jameer Nelson's punk ass and he's easily delivering 25 a game.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

And no, this olympic team isn't better than the dream team, but some people like to put the dream team on some untouchable pedestal that can never be reached...kind of like Jordan. There's a very strong case that they are the best ever, but they're not on some unreachable summit like some of y'all would like to pretend.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Luke said:


> Kobe and LeBron aren't touching Jordan but they are *significantly* better than any wing that Jordan faced in the 90's. And it's not even debatable.
> 
> Oh, and Pippen was the best defender on those Bulls teams. Jordan is on the short list for best perimeter defender ever, but that list probably starts with Scottie.
> 
> And Dwight isn't Kareem or anything but he's sure as hell not that far off from Robinson and Ewing. Especially Ewing. And he's already better than Alonzo. People like to shit on him because his competition is wack or because he isn't smooth in the post, but he's on the short list for one of the best defenders ever, he's a tenacious rebounder, and for all of his offensive shortcomings he still easily gets his 20 a night on 60% despite *never* playing with a great playmaker. Give him someone better than Jameer Nelson's punk ass and he's easily delivering 25 a game.


As total players they are, but not as defenders in terms of MJ's total career (which also did include the 80s). Kobe Bryant is not a significantly better defender than Joe Dumars, Dennis Rodman, Dennis Johnson or Michael Cooper. And I'd argue those were tougher matchups for Jordan than Drexler anyway. 

And then let's apply the inverse of your argument. Let's see what happens when we flip it on Kobe. Has KOBE BRYANT ever faced anyone close to as good as MICHAEL JORDAN? Not even close to being somewhat close. Pretty funny how the thinking turns when we hold Kobe to the same standard.

What's hilarious are all of these guys who became great defenders off of their reputation for defending Kobe. Bruce Bowen? An old Bowen made a reputation out of covering Bryant. This guy must not have been playing in Jordan's day, right? Oh, wrong. He was YOUNG, like 26 in Jordan's second stint (96-98). He could barely get off the bench and when he did, an old Jordan skull pounded him.

Doug Christie was older when he made a reputation out of playing solid defense on Bryant. Funny that a young Christie on Toronto was Jordan's prison bitch lol. 

Has LEBRON ever faced a defender like Scottie Pippen? Not even close. Shawn Marion was defending Lebron when he needed a mayo ventilator in the Finals last year.

Howard close to Ewing in terms of fluidity as a post scorer? Really? I just want to make sure you're actually saying that.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Luke said:


> And no, this olympic team isn't better than the dream team, but some people like to put the dream team on some untouchable pedestal that can never be reached...kind of like Jordan. There's a very strong case that they are the best ever, but they're not on some unreachable summit like some of y'all would like to pretend.


This is yet another claim on this board with no rationale to support it. Go player by player and tell me why? Additionally, address the idea that in today's politic-free, ultra-marketed game, Isiah Thomas and Shaq would be on the team.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Luke said:


> And no, this olympic team isn't better than the dream team, but some people like to put the dream team on some untouchable pedestal that can never be reached...kind of like Jordan. There's a very strong case that they are the best ever, but they're not on some unreachable summit like some of y'all would like to pretend.


Seriously. Jordan is awesome and you can only judge someone against their competition, but just straight up Mike was winning 6 rings during a pretty weak ass league. Who were the other great teams around? Rockets? They never faced them in the playoffs. Suns? Maybe for one year. Magic? Give me a break. Jazz? That was probably the best of the bunch, but what does that really say? It wasn't like he was winning titles in the 80s. Speaking of which, in the middle of all this "LeBron isn't Jordan" and "Jordan is the greatest winner of all time" nonsense, the world seems to have forgotten that Mike had 6 years without winning a ring before he got the first one at age 27. LeBron is 27 right now. Jordan was a stats guy in the 80s, his public perception was not much different Nique's until he started winning in his late 20s.

Now, with all my defense of the 2012 team, I have no idea who would have won. I still think Robinson would have been the toughest matchup for either team. But I also think it's ridiculous to assume Pippen is running point for the Dream Team and checking Rose. Okay great... so who is guarding Kobe and Lebron? Jordan and... Chris Mullen? Pippen can bring the ball up the court, but who is getting guys shots? He's still not a playmaker for other players. Or is this team running the triangle under Chuck Daly? Barkley was the round mound of rebounds, but Durant would be dragging him all around the floor and Sir Charles couldn't even get up high enough to seriously contest those shots. FIBA rules with the trepezoid lane and short 3-point line (btw, in 92 none of those guys were consistently hitting 3s with the exception of Bird and Mullen... Jordan went 27/100 the whole year... LeBron has never shot that bad from 3 his entire career, don't even begin to talk about Kobe and Durant), I think the young guys might win it. NBA rules with the normal lane, probably the older guys because of their post advantage. But even that, I think Kevin Love and Dwight Howard could probably play with Robinson and Barkley and hold their own somewhat, and Love can stretch the floor too.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Hoodey said:


> And then let's apply the inverse of your argument. Let's see what happens when we flip it on Kobe. Has KOBE BRYANT ever faced anyone close to as good as MICHAEL JORDAN? Not even close to being somewhat close. Pretty funny how the thinking turns when we hold Kobe to the same standard.


Oh please. Jordan was a great defender, but there are still awesome defenders in the league who stick around because they are specialists. And the game is a more specialized game now. Don't act like Ron Artest, Shawn Marion, even Tony Allen, Josh Smith, and Shane Battier aren't/weren't great defenders. If they played in the 80s they would have had every bit the reputation of Michael Cooper or Joe Dumars defensively. And they are long as well as quick footed.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> And then let's apply the inverse of your argument. Let's see what happens when we flip it on Kobe. Has KOBE BRYANT ever faced anyone close to as good as MICHAEL JORDAN?


Um yeah. Michael Jordan. 

98 all star game is the greatest ever!

Kobe dominated Christie. I still remember him getting 40 points and 18 rebounds in a close out game 4 sweep against him in 2001. 

You are one of those Phil knight Jordan is untouchable discplies. Bruce Bowen was barely a 12th man when Jordan was in the league and I wouldn't be shocked if they never spent a minute on the court together.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> Seriously. Jordan is awesome and you can only judge someone against their competition, but just straight up Mike was winning 6 rings during a pretty weak ass league. Who were the other great teams around? Rockets? They never faced them in the playoffs. Suns? Maybe for one year. Magic? Give me a break. Jazz? That was probably the best of the bunch, but what does that really say? It wasn't like he was winning titles in the 80s. Speaking of which, in the middle of all this "LeBron isn't Jordan" and "Jordan is the greatest winner of all time" nonsense, the world seems to have forgotten that Mike had 6 years without winning a ring before he got the first one at age 27. LeBron is 27 right now. Jordan was a stats guy in the 80s, his public perception was not much different Nique's until he started winning in his late 20s.
> 
> Now, with all my defense of the 2012 team, I have no idea who would have won. I still think Robinson would have been the toughest matchup for either team. But I also think it's ridiculous to assume Pippen is running point for the Dream Team and checking Rose. Okay great... so who is guarding Kobe and Lebron? Jordan and... Chris Mullen? Pippen can bring the ball up the court, but who is getting guys shots? He's still not a playmaker for other players. Or is this team running the triangle under Chuck Daly? Barkley was the round mound of rebounds, but Durant would be dragging him all around the floor and Sir Charles couldn't even get up high enough to seriously contest those shots. FIBA rules with the trepezoid lane and short 3-point line (btw, in 92 none of those guys were consistently hitting 3s with the exception of Bird and Mullen... Jordan went 27/100 the whole year... LeBron has never shot that bad from 3 his entire career, don't even begin to talk about Kobe and Durant), I think the young guys might win it. NBA rules with the normal lane, probably the older guys because of their *post advantage*. But even that, I think Kevin Love and Dwight Howard could probably play with Robinson and Barkley and hold their own somewhat, and Love can stretch the floor too.


You don't win ball games without playing the paint.
The Dream Team had Malone and Barkely, P-Ew and Robinson. That's a huge advantage, IMHO.

Sure, a guy like Durant would bring havok, because of it's habillity (sp?) to score efficiently from all over the court; but i would like to see guys like Lebron James and Derrick Rose driving against Malone and Robinson.

Yes, it can be said that "Magic couldn't guard Rose", and "Pippen never had to defend a guy like Lebron", but when it's all said and done, the Dream Team would severely punish the other guys in the paint.

And i'm not even gonna bring the fact that (i) the Dream Team was filled with guys who understood (and played accordingly) Team Ball (ii) they had arguably the two best passers ever from the PG spot (iii) they had two very great wing defenders in Jordan and Pippen.

The New Guys could win a game or two (mainly if someone goes insane from the 3point line), but chances are (IMHO) that the Dream Team wins at least 7 out of 10.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Hoodey said:


> Howard close to Ewing in terms of fluidity as a post scorer? Really? I just want to make sure you're actually saying that.


When did I say that? I'm not going to get dragged into a drawn out debate with a poster that can't read.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Again, I am going to preface this post by stating that Kobe and LeBron are *not* as good as Jordan. *Not.*

But they have also had to deal with a league that has had significantly more competition on the wing, and they play in an NBA that caters defenses around stopping all star wing players. That was not the case in the 80's and 90's. A prime Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Durant, and T-Mac are all clearly better than any wing that Jordan played in the 90's. If you exclude Drexler then guys like Pierce, Allen, and Iverson come to mind as well.

They also had to deal with far tougher defenses. I don't mean that in the sense that the NBA as a whole is better defensively today than it was in the 90's, but the outlier defensive oriented teams of the past decade are far better than any defense Jordan played in his championship runs. Jordan never played a defense like the 2004 Pistons when he was winning titles. Or the 2008 Celtics. Not even close.

Oh, and Bruce Bowen was a late bloomer that did not find his place in the league until he developed as a player. Trying to diminish his talent as a defender is ****ing stupid. Same with a prime Battier. Or Artest. Or whoever else your think isn't on the same level as short ass Joe Dumars.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

If the Dream team gets Thomas, then the Redeem team should get KG... It's only fair. Lol


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Luke said:


> Again, I am going to preface this post by stating that Kobe and LeBron are *not* as good as Jordan. *Not.*
> 
> But they have also had to deal with a league that has had significantly more competition on the wing, and they play in an NBA that caters defenses around stopping all star wing players. That was not the case in the 80's and 90's. A prime Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Durant, and T-Mac are all clearly better than any wing that Jordan played in the 90's. If you exclude Drexler then guys like Pierce, Allen, and Iverson come to mind as well.
> 
> ...


I continue to recall when the zone first came back prime McGrady said he had no idea how to solve it...and shortly thereafter he became a jumpshooter


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

the thing about comparing MJordan to players of today is size.

jordan in his time was especially early in his career was a huge 2 guard , in that sense he revolutionized the position . he was basically too big for most 2 guards and too quick for most forwards and when considering his dominance its important to realize ,mostly because of him shooting guard size became important ,it was very common before jordan to have a 6'3-6'4 shooting guard , now that player almost always has to be able to play some point guard, guys like andrew toney , byron scott , jeff malone , alvin roberson, ricky pierce just had to score

so because of jordan's impact he's not so big today and a lot of what he did easy then would be harder now.

most of shooting guards on teams today would give jordan listed at 6'6 198 most of his career problems he didn't face consistently back then.


in the finals he faced hersey hawkins 6'3 190 on that team today there is thabo 6'5 215 and harden 6'5 220
jeff hornecek he faced twice 6'3 190 now alec burks 6'6 195 and raja bell 6'5 205
byron scott 6'4 200 kobe 6'7 205
drexler 6'7 220 wes matthews 6'5 220
majerle 6'6 220 jared dudley 6'7 225

he could physically bully guards of 20-25 years ago much easier then ...it would not nearly be the case now.


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

Didn't Majerle hold Jordan to just over 40ppg in the finals?


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Luke said:


> Again, I am going to preface this post by stating that Kobe and LeBron are *not* as good as Jordan. *Not.*
> 
> But they have also had to deal with a league that has had significantly more competition on the wing, and they play in an NBA that caters defenses around stopping all star wing players. That was not the case in the 80's and 90's. A prime Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Durant, and T-Mac are all clearly better than any wing that Jordan played in the 90's. If you exclude Drexler then guys like Pierce, Allen, and Iverson come to mind as well.
> 
> ...


A 40 year old Jordan did put up 23 points 11 rebounds 3 assist games against the 2003 Detroit Pistons who had Billups, Hamilton, Wallace, Okur, Atkins etc etc and won 50 games that year. Following up the next year winning the championship after getting Rasheed Wallace. 

So you're going to tell me A 40 year old Jordan on a bum knee, in his prime is going to have a hard time against defense today ? Sorry, I'm not buying it. 

Also Earl Boykins 5'5" specialist weighs a buck thirty can make an NBA roster in 2012. Come on, you're grossly exaggerating the impact of size and athletic ability in todays NBA game. 

Let's also not forget that the NBA eliminated hand checking, and toned down the NBA's culture and over all physical nature of the game. 

Also I can't believe the way you're talking about Clyde Drexler, the guy is one of the greatest two guards of all time. In fact I only have Kobe and Jordan ahead of him on my all time ranking list for SG's. 

And here is old man Jordan at 40 going against the great Ron Artest ..


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Nimreitz said:


> Oh please. Jordan was a great defender, but there are still awesome defenders in the league who stick around because they are specialists. And the game is a more specialized game now. Don't act like Ron Artest, Shawn Marion, even Tony Allen, Josh Smith, and Shane Battier aren't/weren't great defenders. If they played in the 80s they would have had every bit the reputation of Michael Cooper or Joe Dumars defensively. And they are long as well as quick footed.


So you're telling me you think Jordan would shoot 37% against the 04 Pistons or disappear in 4th quarters in a loss to the Dallas Mavericks?

Here, for all of you guys who watched Jordan in 96 and think that that's who he is, watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1FsD9Y7NfY

Only fair since you're bombarded with Lebron highlights every day now.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Jamel Irief said:


> Um yeah. Michael Jordan.
> 
> 98 all star game is the greatest ever!
> 
> ...


Ha ha, Jordan was 35. Kobe looked old this year. He's gonna be a neutered old man that 98 Jordan would take a crap on at age 35.

I'll never say anyone is untouchable, but Kobe just hasn't done it man. Jordan was ridiculously more statistically productive and never had to rely on a player like Shaq and STILL go to the wire with teams like the 00 Blazers and 02 Kings.

You just made my point for me on Bowen. If the 96-98 game would be so easy to infiltrate for players who played later, then WHY WAS Bowen a 12th man? He was what, 26 years old. Most players are in their prime at that age. But Bowen wasn't shit, until Kobe's era lol. Isn't that kinda funny. 

That kinda helps you see how Kobe WOULD shoot 37% against the Pistons and Celtics and Jordan wouldn't. Because he crapped on Bowen (and yes, Miami did put him in the game sometimes, it wasn't pretty).


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Nimreitz said:


> Seriously. Jordan is awesome and you can only judge someone against their competition, but just straight up Mike was winning 6 rings during a pretty weak ass league. Who were the other great teams around? Rockets? They never faced them in the playoffs. Suns? Maybe for one year. Magic? Give me a break. Jazz? That was probably the best of the bunch, but what does that really say? It wasn't like he was winning titles in the 80s. Speaking of which, in the middle of all this "LeBron isn't Jordan" and "Jordan is the greatest winner of all time" nonsense, the world seems to have forgotten that Mike had 6 years without winning a ring before he got the first one at age 27. LeBron is 27 right now. Jordan was a stats guy in the 80s, his public perception was not much different Nique's until he started winning in his late 20s.
> 
> Now, with all my defense of the 2012 team, I have no idea who would have won. I still think Robinson would have been the toughest matchup for either team. But I also think it's ridiculous to assume Pippen is running point for the Dream Team and checking Rose. Okay great... so who is guarding Kobe and Lebron? Jordan and... Chris Mullen? Pippen can bring the ball up the court, but who is getting guys shots? He's still not a playmaker for other players. Or is this team running the triangle under Chuck Daly? Barkley was the round mound of rebounds, but Durant would be dragging him all around the floor and Sir Charles couldn't even get up high enough to seriously contest those shots. FIBA rules with the trepezoid lane and short 3-point line (btw, in 92 none of those guys were consistently hitting 3s with the exception of Bird and Mullen... Jordan went 27/100 the whole year... LeBron has never shot that bad from 3 his entire career, don't even begin to talk about Kobe and Durant), I think the young guys might win it. NBA rules with the normal lane, probably the older guys because of their post advantage. But even that, I think Kevin Love and Dwight Howard could probably play with Robinson and Barkley and hold their own somewhat, and Love can stretch the floor too.


Who were the great teams around when Kobe won his rings?

00 Blazers? That was ancient Scottie, young Rasheed and who else? Scottie was an awesome second fiddle, but Pippen and Rasheed taking you seven games when you HAVE SHAQ?? 

Let's see, Pippen/Wallace or

Magic/Worthy
Isiah/Dumars/Rodman/Laimbeer
Stockton/Malone

02 Kings? They were the best team Kobe and Shaq beat and as their careers went on, were they really as good as they were made out to be because they were taking LA to the brink of elimination?

Webber? He looked like he had promise then, but LA made him look a lot better than he really was. Ironically, he never did anything against anyone that was as impressive as what he did against Kobe? Last I checked he was a fat jumpshooter on Philly and Detroit. 

Bibby? How good did he end up being? LA made him look great. Who else did?

Predrag? LOL. Wasn't he toiling in mediocrity on the Hornets years later? What did he end up accomplishing? 

Who did Kobe beat? The 10 Celtics? I thought they were old in 08. 

Jordan beat teams with two and three hall of famers. Kobe?


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Nimreitz said:


> Seriously. Jordan is awesome and you can only judge someone against their competition, but just straight up Mike was winning 6 rings during a pretty weak ass league. Who were the other great teams around? Rockets? They never faced them in the playoffs. Suns? Maybe for one year. Magic? Give me a break. Jazz? That was probably the best of the bunch, but what does that really say? It wasn't like he was winning titles in the 80s. Speaking of which, in the middle of all this "LeBron isn't Jordan" and "Jordan is the greatest winner of all time" nonsense, the world seems to have forgotten that Mike had 6 years without winning a ring before he got the first one at age 27. LeBron is 27 right now. Jordan was a stats guy in the 80s, his public perception was not much different Nique's until he started winning in his late 20s.
> 
> Now, with all my defense of the 2012 team, I have no idea who would have won. I still think Robinson would have been the toughest matchup for either team. But I also think it's ridiculous to assume Pippen is running point for the Dream Team and checking Rose. Okay great... so who is guarding Kobe and Lebron? Jordan and... Chris Mullen?  Pippen can bring the ball up the court, but who is getting guys shots? He's still not a playmaker for other players. Or is this team running the triangle under Chuck Daly? Barkley was the round mound of rebounds, but Durant would be dragging him all around the floor and Sir Charles couldn't even get up high enough to seriously contest those shots. FIBA rules with the trepezoid lane and short 3-point line (btw, in 92 none of those guys were consistently hitting 3s with the exception of Bird and Mullen... Jordan went 27/100 the whole year... LeBron has never shot that bad from 3 his entire career, don't even begin to talk about Kobe and Durant), I think the young guys might win it. NBA rules with the normal lane, probably the older guys because of their post advantage. But even that, I think Kevin Love and Dwight Howard could probably play with Robinson and Barkley and hold their own somewhat, and Love can stretch the floor too.


Stockton would guard Rose and do fine. Rose is quick and penetrates, but he doesn't keep his dribble get all the way to the rim and finish. Not with a shotblocker like David Robinson in there. 

As for offensively, you've never seen Jordan pre-Phil Jackson have you? He only averaged something like 33 PPG 11 RPG and 12 APG in 70 starts at the point between 88 and 90. 

Also, unlike the current team, the 92 team can drop the ball down to superstar centers with athleticism and Wooden-style post games. Dwight Howard isn't going to score on Robinson or Ewing. They would score on him. And that's not athleticism. That's a functional post game which players today lack. 

That's what you're not getting. The fundamentals of the game weren't taught to Jordan, Magic, Bird, Ewing and Robinson by AAU street pimps lol. They were taught to them by playing 3-4 years for good coaches in college. 

I'm sorry, but I'm not seeing a guy playing for the AAU team "Mean Streets" in Chicago, then getting pimped out to Tom Izzo for one year coming into the NBA with the same fundamental base as a guy who plays 3 years for Dean Smith at the height of his coaching prowess.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Luke said:


> When did I say that? I'm not going to get dragged into a drawn out debate with a poster that can't read.


You said:

"And Dwight isn't Kareem or anything but he's sure as hell not that far off from Robinson and Ewing. Especially Ewing."

As an athlete if you're not playing basketball but just doing a combine test NFL style in a weight room? Sure he's not.

When you add Ewing's offensive footwork in the post and ability to get position, seal off for the ball and score with an array of Wooden-style post moves?

He's not even CLOSE. And I want Dwight for the Bulls, as a second fiddle, because he'll never get rid of that stiffness he has down low. He makes Alonzo Mourning look like a guy who is just smooth as can be down low.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Luke said:


> Again, I am going to preface this post by stating that Kobe and LeBron are *not* as good as Jordan. *Not.*
> 
> But they have also had to deal with a league that has had significantly more competition on the wing, and they play in an NBA that caters defenses around stopping all star wing players. That was not the case in the 80's and 90's.


First, I'm not letting falsehoods go, just because you passive-aggressively begin with "I'm not saying Kobe and Lebron are as good as Jordan." The guy who gets away with falsehoods and says that today is going to say the opposite if Lebron wins a ring.

Second, have you ever heard of the Jordan Rules defense? Employed by:

Laimbeer
Edwards
Rodman
Dumars
Jordan

That defense was entirely focused on stopping Jordan and if he got to the rim the rule was no layups. "But coach Daley, in this play, I'd literally have to tackle him not to allow a dunk." "Okay John, and this warrants pausing our film session why?" 

Your second paragraph shows that you literally don't know what you're talking about. 



> A prime Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Durant, and T-Mac are all clearly better than any wing that Jordan played in the 90's. If you exclude Drexler then guys like Pierce, Allen, and Iverson come to mind as well.


You think Tracy McGrady was better than Clyde Drexler? Wow. McGrady was a volume scorer who never left the first round and wasn't interested in playing basketball as part of a team or defense at all. 

And basketball isn't a game where you say "okay, you're going to play offense like that. Sure, I can't DEFEND you, but let me see if I can impress you more with my offense on the other end."

Dennis Rodman or Joe Dumars are a harder matchup than a guy who scores but isn't going to guard you. Dwyane Wade is not guarding Jordan as well as Dumars. And before you reply, consider that Jordan always said his hardest time penetrating came against smaller guards because they had the center of gravity and agility to cut off his dribble better. 

Lebron and Durant aren't SGs, they're SFs. Neither is guarding Jordan at all because he was a SG with the first step of a PG. He'd blow by either one of them. 

Dennis Rodman, in 89 before his conversion from SF to full-time PF was a better defender than all of those guys. Again, it's not horse. You don't say "sure I can't guard you, but let me see how much I can impress you with my offense on the other end. Maybe that will hurt your feelings and you won't score on me as much." You have to be able to guard someone. 

As a defender, who is better than Dennis freaking Rodman, who guarded everyone from Magic to Jordan to Ewing in his prime.



> They also had to deal with far tougher defenses. I don't mean that in the sense that the NBA as a whole is better defensively today than it was in the 90's, but the outlier defensive oriented teams of the past decade are far better than any defense Jordan played in his championship runs. Jordan never played a defense like the 2004 Pistons when he was winning titles. Or the 2008 Celtics. Not even close.
> 
> Oh, and Bruce Bowen was a late bloomer that did not find his place in the league until he developed as a player. Trying to diminish his talent as a defender is ****ing stupid. Same with a prime Battier. Or Artest. Or whoever else your think isn't on the same level as short ass Joe Dumars.


Dude you have no idea what you're talking about.

The 93 Knicks? The 91 Pistons? Ever heard of them? Defensively they crap on the 04 Pistons. The 04 Pistons like the 02 Kings are just another team people like you overrate, because other than rating them way too high, how are you going to explain the Lakers struggles AGAINST them, right.

*Also, Kobe shot something like 38% against the Pistons. You're acting like he did WELL against the 04 Pistons. He didn't. And his team lost the series 4-1

Jordan shot 53.5% against the 91 Pistons.*

And since you're bragging about defenses that Kobe lost badly to, then that means I can bring up any team Jordan ever played in the playoffs, even if he lost, to cite MJ's individual performance, right?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> Ha ha, Jordan was 35. Kobe looked old this year. He's gonna be a neutered old man that 98 Jordan would take a crap on at age 35.
> 
> I'll never say anyone is untouchable, but Kobe just hasn't done it man. Jordan was ridiculously more statistically productive and never had to rely on a player like Shaq and STILL go to the wire with teams like the 00 Blazers and 02 Kings.
> 
> ...


You are being disengenous. Bowen broke in with the Celtics and was waived by your bulls after the Celtics didn't want him back. He didn't play for Miami until Jordan was retired again. The reason he didn't stick until later on is because, by Bowen's own admission, he didn't make an effort to be a defensive specialist until Riley talked him into it. Prior to that he still pictured himself as a scorer.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Hoodey said:


> You said:
> 
> "And Dwight isn't Kareem or anything but he's sure as hell not that far off from Robinson and Ewing. Especially Ewing."
> 
> ...


Dwight Howard does not have nearly as much of an impact on a basketball game that Kareem had. He does, however, impact the game at the same level that guys like Patrick Ewing and David Robinson did. Especially Ewing. And he's already better than Alonzo ever was.

Where did I bring up Howard's post repertoire in comparison to those guys? Show me. Again, *reading comprehension is key.* There is no point in you wasting time writing full length essays when you are not even countering the post that you quoted in the first place.


----------



## carrrnuttt (Dec 4, 2004)

Some of you guys act like people from the 90's and older don't know what the hell being an athlete is about. Even with our modern technology, world records from decades ago are still being beat in increments of milliseconds. FloJo's records from the 80's still stand today.

You add to the fact that basketball is a game of skill, not just athleticism.






^ Feel free to point where in those old school videos where any of those wouldn't be considered a highlight even in today's "much more athletic/skilled" NBA?


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

The biggest difference today is that guys are bigger and stronger. The "athleticism" is the same, but it comes in a bigger package. Derrick Rose is without a doubt the best physical package of any point guard ever with the possible exception of Oscar Robertson. Lebron James can say the same thing about Small Forward. And one thing that Jalen Rose hammers home every week on his podcast is how much zone defense changed the NBA. A team used to be able to just play 2 on 2 with the rest of their guys standing across the street from the arena, and teams did do that. Karl Malone wasn't great on the pick and roll because of tremendous skill (although he was good), but because he had a great point guard who could get him the ball in the right spot, and because of the illegal defense rule there was never any help defense. Anyone who was an exceptional driver with a streaky shot would struggle to adapt to today's game at least initially, and that includes MJ.

It's honestly why LeBron gets so much gripe about late game heroics. With help defense it's so much harder for him to take it inside, which is why he settles for jumpshots a lot (this doesn't explain every instance, but it does explain many of them). MJ could drive at the end of games and not have a big guy clogging the lane and another dude sliding under him to take a charge. So I repeat, with the closer 3 point line, the allowance for zone defense, and the trapezoid lane in FIBA rules, the new guys would win. Classic NBA rules, it's the Dream Team.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Jamel Irief said:


> You are being disengenous. Bowen broke in with the Celtics and was waived by your bulls after the Celtics didn't want him back. He didn't play for Miami until Jordan was retired again. The reason he didn't stick until later on is because, by Bowen's own admission, he didn't make an effort to be a defensive specialist until Riley talked him into it. Prior to that he still pictured himself as a scorer.


Bowen was on the Heat after Jordan's first retirement. You can claim it was for any reason you want, but Bowen when he was young and athletic was shittier than Jason Caffey. 

Jordan shot 44% at age 40 in 2003, but yeah, we all know superior track and field athletes are always better basketball players.


----------



## carrrnuttt (Dec 4, 2004)

Nimreitz said:


> The biggest difference today is that guys are bigger and stronger.


See, everyone keeps saying this, but have yet to prove it with anything other than speculation. What's your proof of this?


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Luke said:


> Dwight Howard does not have nearly as much of an impact on a basketball game that Kareem had. He does, however, impact the game at the same level that guys like Patrick Ewing and David Robinson did. Especially Ewing. And he's already better than Alonzo ever was.
> 
> Where did I bring up Howard's post repertoire in comparison to those guys? Show me. Again, *reading comprehension is key.* There is no point in you wasting time writing full length essays when you are not even countering the post that you quoted in the first place.


But that's your own BS worthless opinion. 

I'M telling you that you can't impact the game as much as Ewing and Robinson despite being a better athlete than Ewing and Robinson, especially Ewing (much better post player) if you're as stiff and deliberate as Howard is in the post.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Nimreitz said:


> The biggest difference today is that guys are bigger and stronger. The "athleticism" is the same, but it comes in a bigger package. Derrick Rose is without a doubt the best physical package of any point guard ever with the possible exception of Oscar Robertson. Lebron James can say the same thing about Small Forward. And one thing that Jalen Rose hammers home every week on his podcast is how much zone defense changed the NBA. A team used to be able to just play 2 on 2 with the rest of their guys standing across the street from the arena, and teams did do that. Karl Malone wasn't great on the pick and roll because of tremendous skill (although he was good), but because he had a great point guard who could get him the ball in the right spot, and because of the illegal defense rule there was never any help defense. Anyone who was an exceptional driver with a streaky shot would struggle to adapt to today's game at least initially, and that includes MJ.
> 
> It's honestly why LeBron gets so much gripe about late game heroics. With help defense it's so much harder for him to take it inside, which is why he settles for jumpshots a lot (this doesn't explain every instance, but it does explain many of them). MJ could drive at the end of games and not have a big guy clogging the lane and another dude sliding under him to take a charge. So I repeat, with the closer 3 point line, the allowance for zone defense, and the trapezoid lane in FIBA rules, the new guys would win. Classic NBA rules, it's the Dream Team.


Wow, you just need to start by watching MJ against the Pistons in the late 80s. It pretty much refutes everything you said about the guy. You're just another kid who saw him in 96 and thinks "yeah, that's MJ."


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Nimreitz said:


> The biggest difference today is that guys are bigger and stronger. The "athleticism" is the same, but it comes in a bigger package. Derrick Rose is without a doubt the best physical package of any point guard ever with the possible exception of Oscar Robertson. Lebron James can say the same thing about Small Forward. And one thing that Jalen Rose hammers home every week on his podcast is how much zone defense changed the NBA. A team used to be able to just play 2 on 2 with the rest of their guys standing across the street from the arena, and teams did do that. Karl Malone wasn't great on the pick and roll because of tremendous skill (although he was good), but because he had a great point guard who could get him the ball in the right spot, and because of the illegal defense rule there was never any help defense. Anyone who was an exceptional driver with a streaky shot would struggle to adapt to today's game at least initially, and that includes MJ.
> 
> It's honestly why LeBron gets so much gripe about late game heroics. With help defense it's so much harder for him to take it inside, which is why he settles for jumpshots a lot (this doesn't explain every instance, but it does explain many of them). MJ could drive at the end of games and not have a big guy clogging the lane and another dude sliding under him to take a charge. So I repeat, with the closer 3 point line, the allowance for zone defense, and the trapezoid lane in FIBA rules, the new guys would win. Classic NBA rules, it's the Dream Team.


Who is bigger and stronger than Shaq? Shaq in 94 would eat Dwight Howard alive. He was 30 lbs. heavier and a much better athlete. 

Man the Thunder like to choke. Wow. They are just shooting themselves in the face in this series. 

Because you can say "okay but these 30 guys are more athletic than Joe Dumars and Horace Grant," but guess what? 

The Bulls had no problems with Shaq in 96. Ever think about that? 

Who was LESS athletic than Bird? Probably no one he ever faced. 

You don't GET IT.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Dwight Howard is a great example of this chauvanistic attitude towards the past - he's neither as big nor is he maybe as athletic as Robinson was

and that's before you even start talking about skill set


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> Bowen was on the Heat after Jordan's first retirement. You can claim it was for any reason you want, but Bowen when he was young and athletic was shittier than Jason Caffey.
> 
> Jordan shot 44% at age 40 in 2003, but yeah, we all know superior track and field athletes are always better basketball players.


I just looked it up and he played one game with the heat prior to 1998. And Jordan didn't "pound his skull" or whatever you said because that game was against the bulls. 

Not sure what that second paragraph has anything to o with what I said.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

e-monk said:


> Dwight Howard is a great example of this chauvanistic attitude towards the past - he's neither as big nor is he maybe as athletic as Robinson was
> 
> and that's before you even start talking about skill set


No, Howard does have 25 lbs. on Robinson, but I don't think he's quite as tall. He's no better an athlete and probably a worse leaper, but he's way below even David in SKILL. It's not close.

The ultimate proof of skill making up probably more than athleticism is Larry Bird. That guy barely had the athleticism of Refrigerator Perry, but he messed people up his whole career because he was probably the most skilled player across the board ever. Some guys now have major holes in their skill game. Some guys are pretty skilled across the board or have one or two major skills they get by on. Bird was off the charts in all skill aspects.

Who was better? Dominique Wilkins or Bird? Julius Erving or Bird? Heck, Bird put up huge numbers in his few matchups with Scottie Pippen. 

Also, people need to understand why these players are bigger and more athletic. 

Scientists have said that evolution doesn't occur in human beings over a period of 25, 50 or even 100 years. So if these players are bigger and more athletic, you have to ask why? Well we know there's hormones in the food, that's one big reason. Roids? HGH? I think those are just NOT investigated in the NBA. Because that's what "newer training methods" means. It doesn't mean whey protein and trips to the weight room. 

Basically, at the end of the day, if MJ played today and was born in 1985, he'd have access to all the same hormone chicken and cream and clear and he'd be 6'7" 215.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Jamel Irief said:


> I just looked it up and he played one game with the heat prior to 1998. And Jordan didn't "pound his skull" or whatever you said because that game was against the bulls.
> 
> Not sure what that second paragraph has anything to o with what I said.


Sorry, I had the wrong team. The point is, I saw him play against MJ.

10/31/1997, Bowen plays 27 minutes for the Boston Celtics. He's 26 and in his athletic prime. Jordan turned 35 that season. On that night, Jordan had 30. Where was this legendary defense?

Kobe is 33. Can you imagine him putting up 30 on a young Bruce Bowen in the beginning of the 2014-15 season? 

12/3/1997, Bowen plays 30 minutes for Boston. Jordan has 29 points, 9 rebounds and shoots 52.4%.

3/23/1998, Bowen plays 22 minutes for Boston. Jordan has 24 points, 7 rebounds and shoots 50.0%.

You were saying?


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Howard is 6'10" 240-250, Robinson was 7'1" 230-250(heavier later) over the course of his career (and in any event weight differences over decades are negligible, I bet if Dwight was playing at pace where he was making an extra trip down the floor every 3 minutes he'd lighten up his bulk while if Robinson wanted to rock up a little more he could)


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

e-monk said:


> Howard is 6'10" 240-250, Robinson was 7'1" 230-250(heavier later) over the course of his career (and in any event weight differences over decades are negligible, I bet if Dwight was playing at pace where he was making an extra trip down the floor every 3 minutes he'd lighten up his bulk while if Robinson wanted to rock up a little more he could)


NBA.com has him at 265.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> The Bulls had no problems with Shaq in 96. Ever think about that?


shaq avg 27 points on .593 shooting vs. the bulls that season.

i think you may be disingenuous in your responses.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> Sorry, I had the wrong team. The point is, I saw him play against MJ.
> 
> 10/31/1997, Bowen plays 27 minutes for the Boston Celtics. He's 26 and in his athletic prime. Jordan turned 35 that season. On that night, Jordan had 30. Where was this legendary defense?
> 
> ...


The fact that you blatantly ignored his fg% in the first game and flaunt in the others confirms what I suspected about you. You're intellectually dishonest, stubborn and will skewer facts to help your view point. This isn't the debate club.

You didn't even remember what team Bowen was on. And I take it you remember they were matched up together evey minute Bowen played?

Bill Simmons and basketball reference is not enough to form a valid opinion my friend.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Hoodey said:


> Webber? He looked like he had promise then, but LA made him look a lot better than he really was. Ironically, he never did anything against anyone that was as impressive as what he did against Kobe? Last I checked he was a fat jumpshooter on Philly and Detroit.....Predrag? LOL. Wasn't he toiling in mediocrity on the Hornets years later? What did he end up accomplishing?


Yea, that's pretty disingenuous, considering that Webber never recovered from blowing out his knee and Peja had consistent back problems (go ask Larry Bird how that works out for you). Both those guys would immediately be the second-best player on the Bulls this past season(big accomplishment, I know), and prime, healthy Webber might relegate Derrick Rose to 1b status.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Da Grinch said:


> shaq avg 27 points on .593 shooting vs. the bulls that season.
> 
> i think you may be disingenuous in your responses.


I was talking about the really important stat. The Bulls winning 4-0 in the playoffs.

During that series there were successful stretches of defense where Dennis Rodman stifled Shaq. Because at age 35 you know what a ridiculous athlete Rodman was compared to Shaq. 

I believe after one of the games he did so well he was asked what his secret was and said that where he was from they used to tip cows way heavier than Shaq.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Jamel Irief said:


> The fact that you blatantly ignored his fg% in the first game and flaunt in the others confirms what I suspected about you. You're intellectually dishonest, stubborn and will skewer facts to help your view point. This isn't the debate club.
> 
> You didn't even remember what team Bowen was on. And I take it you remember they were matched up together evey minute Bowen played?
> 
> Bill Simmons and basketball reference is not enough to form a valid opinion my friend.


You're missing the point. Jordan was 35. If Bowen was so great as a defender when he was old against a young Kobe and other young players of the supposedly more athletic mid-00s, then Jordan not only should have had a bad percentage in the first game, but all off the games, and it should have come with low scoring totals, no?


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Hoodey said:


> You're missing the point. Jordan was 35. If Bowen was so great as a defender when he was old against a young Kobe and other young players of the supposedly more athletic mid-00s, then Jordan not only should have had a bad percentage in the first game, but all off the games, and it should have come with low scoring totals, no?


Look, I don't want to get in on the Kobe vs. Jordan debate because I just don't care about it that much, but Bowen didn't become a defensive specialist until later in his career. It's as intellectually dishonest as saying that Ben Wallace wasn't _really_ that good of a defensive big because he sat the bench behind a 36-year old Otis Thorpe back in his Washington days. Certain guys take several years to "arrive".


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Bogg said:


> Look, I don't want to get in on the Kobe vs. Jordan debate because I just don't care about it that much, but Bowen didn't become a defensive specialist until later in his career. It's as intellectually dishonest as saying that Ben Wallace wasn't _really_ that good of a defensive big because he sat the bench behind a 36-year old Otis Thorpe back in his Washington days. Certain guys take several years to "arrive".


I don't buy it. Some guys have a skill set that lends their game to defense. You can't look at Bruce Bowen's offensive game and say "oh yeah, he can get by being a mediocre defender." 

You're kind of proving my point. When he was young and athletic but lacked the skill he couldn't do anything. When he devoted himself to learning SKILLS then he became better despite being older and way less athletic.

The athleticism-whore crowd is acting like athleticism is all that matters skills be damned. I'm trying to illustrate that it's a game where athleticism can only make you better than the next guy if you have the same skill. If you're way more athletic but wouldn't know the first thing about cutting off a dribble or defensive footwork, it won't help you. 

Are guys who guard SGs bigger and do they jump higher than Dennis Johnson or Joe Dumars? Sure. Have I seen many, if any, who can cut off a dribble or get their hands low and pick off dribbles against good ball handlers the way DJ could? No lol. If a guy was 6'8" but could give a SG fits by just making it difficult for him to even dribble at all, that would be one thing. But when you just have greater track and field athleticism but not the same skill, you're probably worse off.

The best athlete I've ever seen in a basketball game was Eddie Robinson. That guy had a vertical leap of something like 40+ inches, maybe 45 at 6'8". But he had no skills and he sucked as a result.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Bogg said:


> Yea, that's pretty disingenuous, considering that Webber never recovered from blowing out his knee and Peja had consistent back problems (go ask Larry Bird how that works out for you). Both those guys would immediately be the second-best player on the Bulls this past season(big accomplishment, I know), and prime, healthy Webber might relegate Derrick Rose to 1b status.


But you're relying on the unknown for one. Do we know how BAD Peja's back problems were? Or is there a chance they were intermediate and he just didn't put the work in. Do we know that Webber had like Charles Barkley's game going forward but it was just the knee? Or maybe did he settle for too many jumpers.

Excuses for why a player DIDNT do something will never be nearly as convincing as showing you a guy who DID something. 

You claim Webber would relegate Rose to 1b, but how do you know? I still say he was only as good in 02 as LA MADE HIM LOOK.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> I was talking about the really important stat. The Bulls winning 4-0 in the playoffs.
> 
> During that series there were successful stretches of defense where Dennis Rodman stifled Shaq. Because at age 35 you know what a ridiculous athlete Rodman was compared to Shaq.
> 
> I believe after one of the games he did so well he was asked what his secret was and said that where he was from they used to tip cows way heavier than Shaq.



um shaq had a good series vs the bulls.

they lost because outside of penny no one else did much .

game 1 shaq 27 points 13-21 shooting
penny 38 points 15-21
rest of magic starters 0-10 2 points
bench 7-20 16 points

game 2 shaq 13-22 36 points 
penny 6-15 18 points 
rest of magic starters 8-22 25 points
bench 4-12 9 points

game 3
shaq 8-19 17 points
penny 8-24 18
rest of starters 7-20 22
bench 3-14 10 points

game 4.
shaq 11-13 28 points 
penny 9-21 28 points
rest of starters 8-20 19 points
bench 9-12 26 points.

in conclusion

shaq avg. 27 points 60% fg playoffs vs bulls 
27 points .593 fg % regular season

penny avg 25.5 a game that series .469 fg

rest of starters .319 fg avg 17 points per game

bench .396 fg% 15 points a game

i'll say it again i think you are being disingenuous in your posts.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Hoodey said:


> But you're relying on the unknown for one. Do we know how BAD Peja's back problems were? Or is there a chance they were intermediate and he just didn't put the work in. Do we know that Webber had like Charles Barkley's game going forward but it was just the knee? Or maybe did he settle for too many jumpers.


Look, if you want to speculate how bad a guy's injuries were or weren't, then good luck, because you can't prove anything in that regard without medical records, and I'm pretty positive you don't have access to those. The undeniable fact is that both players were noticeably diminished post-injury - Webber's Philly/Detroit years and Peja on the Hornets have _nothing_ to do with the 2002 Kings. If you think that Webber should have been Al Jefferson before Al Jefferson after his knee injury instead of a jumpshooter, then whatever, but it still wouldn't have affected the player he was four years prior. 



Hoodey said:


> You claim Webber would relegate Rose to 1b, but how do you know? I still say he was only as good in 02 as LA MADE HIM LOOK.


Your argument might hold some weight if Peja and Webber were guys who built a reputation off playing at a particularly high level against the Lakers, or if we were discussing a low seed upsetting/almost upsetting a top seed in a series. However, I'm very confident in stating that a guy in the top 10 all-time in 3-pointers made with several all-star nods and an all-nba team appearance before his back problems was a very good offensive forward. Likewise, if back in 2001 you argued that Webber would be remembered alongside Duncan and Garnett as the great forwards of their generation, it would have sounded very reasonable.

If anything, Rose hasn't done all that much in the playoffs to make the argument that he's any better than Webber. I could just as easily argue that Rose has only been as good as playing in sixth gear during the regular season makes him look.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Da Grinch said:


> um shaq had a good series vs the bulls.
> 
> they lost because outside of penny no one else did much .
> 
> ...


You're trumpeting numbers in a loss.

You can get big numbers and lose by not getting others involved.

The Bulls had Longley, Wennington, Rodman. None of them were going to stop Shaq from getting his numbers. 

Shaq was at a whole different level in 2000 when he could not only get his numbers but get others involved.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Bogg said:


> Look, if you want to speculate how bad a guy's injuries were or weren't, then good luck, because you can't prove anything in that regard without medical records, and I'm pretty positive you don't have access to those. The undeniable fact is that both players were noticeably diminished post-injury - Webber's Philly/Detroit years and Peja on the Hornets have _nothing_ to do with the 2002 Kings. If you think that Webber should have been Al Jefferson before Al Jefferson after his knee injury instead of a jumpshooter, then whatever, but it still wouldn't have affected the player he was four years prior.


But it's YOUR CLAIM! You're the one offering the excuse. So YOU prove how bad they were hurt. Are you aware how 'burden of proof' works in a court room? 



> Your argument might hold some weight if Peja and Webber were guys who built a reputation off playing at a particularly high level against the Lakers, or if we were discussing a low seed upsetting/almost upsetting a top seed in a series. However, I'm very confident in stating that a guy in the top 10 all-time in 3-pointers made with several all-star nods and an all-nba team appearance before his back problems was a very good offensive forward. Likewise, if back in 2001 you argued that Webber would be remembered alongside Duncan and Garnett as the great forwards of their generation, it would have sounded very reasonable.
> 
> If anything, Rose hasn't done all that much in the playoffs to make the argument that he's any better than Webber. I could just as easily argue that Rose has only been as good as playing in sixth gear during the regular season makes him look.


You brought up Derrick Rose. Have I ever claimed he's achieved legend status yet? No.

As far as Webber, no, you overrate him. He was a four. Of the fours we've seen with significance in the playoffs since 1980, he lacks the commonality with any of them.

Two were center-forwards who could play either position (Gasol, Duncan), one had near Jordan's athleticism at 6'11" (Garnett), one had the best post moves ever in terms of footwork (McHale).

I don't give stock to fours unless they have something significant that makes them an outlier. Webber didn't.

Do you want to start with the "forget what point we view Webber at, how good was he period, overall in his career, pre and post injury" argument? Because we can have it. And I'll show you how good he wasn't.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> You're trumpeting numbers in a loss.
> 
> You can get big numbers and lose by not getting others involved.
> 
> ...


i'm not trumpeting anything just posting the facts 

the bulls didn't handle shaq at all , they handled everyone else but penny .

you say they handled shaq , so i posted the #s 

you posted he was stopped for long stretches and claimed to remember a quote by rodman on the subject ...when i post his stats, its now about his ability to get the rest of them involved.

by this logic the heat are holding durant and westbrook by keeping harden quiet :lol::lol:


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Hoodey said:


> But it's YOUR CLAIM! You're the one offering the excuse. So YOU prove how bad they were hurt. Are you aware how 'burden of proof' works in a court room?



Webber had microfracture surgery and was obviously never the same player. I don't see what I need to prove there, the surgery itself is proof of the injury. If you don't think his knees were really that bad then you prove it, I don't need to prove that he actually needed the surgery that doctors performed on him. As far as Peja goes, he was in and out of the lineup for a few years and also had back surgery. I'm not talking about guys who complained of chronic soreness for years and never did anything about it, I'm talking about injuries that resulted in surgeries for guys who got noticeably worse after, there's nothing to prove there. 





Hoodey said:


> You brought up Derrick Rose. Have I ever claimed he's achieved legend status yet? No.


I just said that a healthy Webber would be right there with Rose, and I think that Rose is a very good basketball player.




Hoodey said:


> As far as Webber, no, you overrate him. He was a four. Of the fours we've seen with significance in the playoffs since 1980, he lacks the commonality with any of them.
> 
> Two were center-forwards who could play either position (Gasol, Duncan), one had near Jordan's athleticism at 6'11" (Garnett), one had the best post moves ever in terms of footwork (McHale).
> 
> I don't give stock to fours unless they have something significant that makes them an outlier. Webber didn't.


Gasol and McHale were sidekicks, Garnett wasn't his team's best player throughout the playoffs the year he won the title, and Duncan is one the ten best players in league history(and the only one of those four with a Finals MVP, if I remember correctly). Webber was one horrifically officiated game away from winning a title as well, but if your argument is going to center around the claim that anybody who didn't win a title was never any good, then you just go on believing that. I'm pretty secure in my opinion that the guy averaging 24-10-5's when he was healthy was an impactful NBA player.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> You're missing the point. Jordan was 35. If Bowen was so great as a defender when he was old against a young Kobe and other young players of the supposedly more athletic mid-00s, then Jordan not only should have had a bad percentage in the first game, but all off the games, and it should have come with low scoring totals, no?


For us to even begin to discuss that we have to know if they were even matched up together. You clearly don't know if he was and I'll admit I probably didn't watch one of those games.

But again, you'll take anything and try to use it to prove you're "right" even if you don't really belive it.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> um shaq had a good series vs the bulls.
> 
> they lost because outside of penny no one else did much .
> 
> ...


Good FG% and scoring numbers only matter when it's Michael Jordan.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Da Grinch said:


> i'm not trumpeting anything just posting the facts
> 
> the bulls didn't handle shaq at all , they handled everyone else but penny .
> 
> ...


Well you think Carmelo is good, so I don't expect you to grasp any of this.

My thoughts on numbers have been that they only matter when comparing equal winners, or showing that a greater winner also has better numbers than someone who does not win as well.

Basketball is a team game and the number one priority is for your team to win. If you also have numbers as a winner, great. This would be how you would distinguish two off the chart winners from one another like Jordan v. Russell.

If you lose, numbers are as disingenuous as they come. Michael's best scoring numbers came in 1987! He had better numbers in 89 and was ready to win if Pippen was not so immature and young, but in 1987? He probably could have done better to give up 3-5 PPG and create for others. And he knew that as in 89 he was down from 37.1 PPG in 87 to 32.5 PPG but up to 8.0 APG! 

I watched Shaq's whole career. If he had been able to get Scott, Anderson, et al more involved the way he did with the similarly untalented (relatively speaking) Horry, Fisher and Fox, then that series probably goes 6 games even with Grant's injury. 

Jordan was getting his numbers in that series and getting wide open shots for guys who had no ability to create their own shot but could hit a wide open shot delivered to them by Jordan. 

Numbers only matter to the extent you win. If Lebron did not make a sudden shift in terms of relentlessly attacking in the Finals, you never would have compared his numbers favorably to MJ or Kobe unless you're like one of these Wilt idiots who comes in 30 years after the fact and doesn't realize how Wilt disappeared in games and series.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Jamel Irief said:


> Good FG% and scoring numbers only matter when it's Michael Jordan.


Jamel, you wanna have it out, cause it won't be pretty.

Are you saying someone is better than Michael? If so, who? And why? I beg you to say yes because I'll literally take all of the love these people have for you and test it by making you look like a complete chump. If you're not going to say yes, then stop the "he's just biased toward MJ" crap. I'd defend Magic just as ardently from Kobe or Lebron up to this point.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Jamel Irief said:


> For us to even begin to discuss that we have to know if they were even matched up together. You clearly don't know if he was and I'll admit I probably didn't watch one of those games.
> 
> But again, you'll take anything and try to use it to prove you're "right" even if you don't really belive it.


But Jamel, if the athleticism suddenly transformed by lightning right after MJ retired (and believe me, I was hearing the crap already in 2000), then why wasn't a guy who excelled defensively at an older age in the mid 00s able to be so good that he would have screamed to his coaches, by the very nature of his game, "hey, put this guy on MJ. He is not only your best option, but he will do the job?"

The answer is skill. I got someone in this thread to fall into the trap of saying "well, like Ben Wallace, he hadn't committed to defense yet."

That's my point! Athleticism or being athletic at 6'8" doesn't matter if you don't have the skill. If you aren't going to smack open threes, cut off dribbles and play hounding defense like Bowen did in 05, then it won't matter how athletic you are at what size.

My point is that mid 00s Bowen could have played in any era specifically BECAUSE he had gained skill, where as without that skill, he likely would not have excelled in any era.

What's so objectionable here? If he was so good without skill in 98 then his coaches would have said "hey, we HAVE to put this guy on MJ."


----------



## ~Styles~ (May 1, 2006)

I don't think anyone is listening, Hoodey.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

carrrnuttt said:


> See, everyone keeps saying this, but have yet to prove it with anything other than speculation. What's your proof of this?


What the **** do you want me to do, all up the heights and weights of every player in the league?


----------



## JoeyJoJo (May 2, 2012)

Nimreitz said:


> What the **** do you want me to do, all up the heights and weights of every player in the league?


In 1992, the average NBA player was 6'7", 220 lbs.

In 2007, the average NBA player was 6'7", 221 lbs. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_league_average_height,_weight,_age_and_playing_experience

I didn't find anything after 2007.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

JoeyJoJo said:


> In 1992, the average NBA player was 6'7", 220 lbs.
> 
> In 2007, the average NBA player was 6'7", 221 lbs.
> 
> ...


LOL yeah, on the one hand, the guy guarding Jordan would be bigger, but Jordan actually had more trouble with smaller defenders who could stay in front of him, because his fadeaway game, as good as it got in 96, was never as deadly as his game when he got to the paint.

Then, on the flipside, there wouldn't be a Patrick Ewing waiting for Jordan if he played the Heat. Udonis Haslem would be waiting for him. Joel Anthony would be waiting for him.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> Jamel, you wanna have it out, cause it won't be pretty.
> 
> Are you saying someone is better than Michael? If so, who? And why? I beg you to say yes because I'll literally take all of the love these people have for you and test it by making you look like a complete chump. If you're not going to say yes, then stop the "he's just biased toward MJ" crap. I'd defend Magic just as ardently from Kobe or Lebron up to this point.


Im not even in this argument, but you are definitely missing/ignoring the point and then trying to reroute what wasnt said into something that nearly nobody believes. Skip Bayless, is that you?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> Well you think Carmelo is good, so I don't expect you to grasp any of this.
> 
> My thoughts on numbers have been that they only matter when comparing equal winners, or showing that a greater winner also has better numbers than someone who does not win as well.
> 
> ...



its clear you didn't watch the games in question(orl-chi 1996) and its been fun toying with you but once again its time to end it .

basketball is a team game even if you play well and the rest of your team doesn't you lose , and while its hilarious watching you contradict yourself over and over again on various topics , I'll make asuggestion to you .

find a moral center , stop talking out your ass , constantly arguing different sides of numerous topics only to see you argue a different side of the same topic when facts prove you wrong only makes you look bad. and on forums like these people can easily see through it.

its not Lebron's fault you were wrong about durant and the thunder, stop making excuses.

just like it wasn't wilt's fault they lost the 1970 finals, he played well...elgin baylor on the other hand....not so much.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

JoeyJoJo said:


> In 1992, the average NBA player was 6'7", 220 lbs.
> 
> In 2007, the average NBA player was 6'7", 221 lbs.
> 
> ...


The link you posted shows a 5 pound increase in those 15 years from 216 to 221. Don't know where your numbers are from. 5 pounds across the entire league is significant and it's probably even more now.


----------



## JoeyJoJo (May 2, 2012)

What do you mean you don't know where my numbers come from? I posted the link. You clicked on it.

I was looking at 1992-93, which was 219.86 average weight. Didn't realize that 1991-92 was "only" 216.47.

Anyway, in the 2003-04 season, it was at its highest weight of 225.45. It went down every year since then through the last year shown of 2007-08. So based on that data, I don't think we can say it's probably even more now.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> Jamel, you wanna have it out, cause it won't be pretty.
> 
> Are you saying someone is better than Michael? If so, who? And why? I beg you to say yes because I'll literally take all of the love these people have for you and test it by making you look like a complete chump. If you're not going to say yes, then stop the "he's just biased toward MJ" crap. I'd defend Magic just as ardently from Kobe or Lebron up to this point.


I'm not even touching it. It's just hillarious to me, how you point out Jordan's points and field goal percentage as evidence of his dominance yet IN THE SAME THREAD you discredit Shaq's stellar numbers in the same category.

I've never seen someone so horny for debates before.

Are you like this in real life? Are you married? Do you have friends? I don't mean that as a personal attack either, I'm curious.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Da Grinch said:


> its clear you didn't watch the games in question(orl-chi 1996) and its been fun toying with you but once again its time to end it .
> 
> basketball is a team game even if you play well and the rest of your team doesn't you lose , and while its hilarious watching you contradict yourself over and over again on various topics , I'll make asuggestion to you .
> 
> ...


Well I wouldn't say I'm wrong. I'd say Durant is 23. Almost nobody has been great at 23. 

As far as you posting to me about how I post, it's comical. I posted a response. Your only counterargument was:

"basketball is a team game even if you play well and the rest of your team doesn't you lose"

I find this puzzling. 

Game 1 -

The Bulls go off. Orlando loses by 40. Can 27 points justify that by O'neal when Dennis Scott only took two threes and O'neal had 0 blocks while the Bulls shot 55%? Did he play well or score well? He had 6 rebounds? Again, did he play well?

Game 2 -

He was great

Game 3 -

He had 17 points and shot 42%. Is that well to you?

Game 4 - 

In game 4 he only has 9 rebounds and Jordan scores 45 points. Those points didn't just happen in isolation, Shaq was the opposing center.

So did he play well or score well? 

He was hardly unreal, even individually, in that series. 

Less posting about me and more arguing your points...


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Jamel Irief said:


> I'm not even touching it. It's just hillarious to me, how you point out Jordan's points and field goal percentage as evidence of his dominance yet IN THE SAME THREAD you discredit Shaq's stellar numbers in the same category.
> 
> I've never seen someone so horny for debates before.
> 
> Are you like this in real life? Are you married? Do you have friends? I don't mean that as a personal attack either, I'm curious.


I actually just posted about that. 

Who cares about who any of us are in real life? 

You know what's worse than wanting a debate? Being into the marketing of these players or into who they are as people. Not that I'm saying you are, but there are worse things than wanting a debate here.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Jordan was the greatest player of all time, but like every player he was a product of his time. I think it's ridiculous that you cannot conceive of basketball under any rules or against any players making him less than what he was in his time and place. Maybe you've seen Space Jam too many times I don't know. It's even worse that you're citing individual games, and cherry picking those nonetheless; Jordan even had that iconic commercial where he says how many game winning shots he missed, putting individual games and shots in the proper perspective. But you seem completely unable to do that.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Nimreitz said:


> Jordan was the greatest player of all time, but like every player he was a product of his time. I think it's ridiculous that you cannot conceive of basketball under any rules or against any players making him less than what he was in his time and place. Maybe you've seen Space Jam too many times I don't know. It's even worse that you're citing individual games, and cherry picking those nonetheless; Jordan even had that iconic commercial where he says how many game winning shots he missed, putting individual games and shots in the proper perspective. But you seem completely unable to do that.


No, it's you who don't get it. I didn't "see space jam." I wasn't some kid who grew up far away from Chicago and got caught up in the hype. I grew up in the Chicago area and was 8 years old when Jordan joined the Bulls. I've seen him do more amazing things in the late 80s, before he was a winner (and got the resulting press), on a Tuesday night on "Sportschannel" than you'll ever be aware of. I've seen the Celtics and Lakers beat him in 85 or 87, but watched as even Chick Hearn said, "he's simply amazing. He's a one man band." 

You're likely one of these people who started watching him in 96 or even 93 and think "hey, that's Michael."

So spare me this idea that I just got caught up in the mid 90s hype of MJ. MJ's best basketball actually was between 88 and 91. Of course, Pippen was only 22 in 89, so they lost to a great team because Scottie couldn't keep his cool. He lashed out at the Pistons and complained to referees for the entire 89 and 90 ECF. But instead, the narrative was that Jordan, who averaged 8.0 APG in 89, "needed to learn to trust his teammates." 

Jordan wasn't a product of his time at all. He would literally be tearing these guys apart. You talk about the athleticism of the Finals, yet I see guys dribbling balls off of their feet, fouling when the coach doesn't want a foul, jumping into three point shooters, etc. Is Russell Westbrook a better athlete than Isiah Thomas? It's probably a wash. He's not as quick but taller. Is he as disciplined or fundamentally sound as a basketball player? Not even close.

I was listening to this same "product of his time" crap in 2002! 02! Four f-ing years after he retired from the Bulls.


----------



## JoeyJoJo (May 2, 2012)

Hoodey said:


> Is Russell Westbrook a better athlete than Isiah Thomas? It's probably a wash.


To me, Russell Westbrook is one of the most athletic players I've ever seen and I also grew up watching '80's basketball.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Why he always playing the "I don't care how much these people love you" card..what does that have to do with anything


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

JoeyJoJo said:


> To me, Russell Westbrook is one of the most athletic players I've ever seen and I also grew up watching '80's basketball.


The reason I say it's a wash is that he jumps higher and is bigger, but nobody had feet as quick as Zeke's. 

But as a BASKETBALL player is he better? I think everyone since about 02, all the athleticism whores who don't realize it's HGH, roids and hormones in the food (the only thing left over is whey protein and weight machines, since scientists are emphatic that you don't evolve as a human race in 25 or even 100 years) also don't realize that it's a game of skill. If it was just track and field, fine. 

But have you noticed, in track and field, where there is much more vigilance to catch cheaters, world records are being broken by only miniscule amounts. And often times they are being broken by people with enlarged jaws and braces (because the jaw grows, the teeth start to separate, which is why Barry Bonds had braces). 

I watched Lebron as a 6'8" 215 lb. kid. You just don't get to 270 and keep all of your athleticism without artificial help. But there's this ignorance about steroids and HGH. This thought that the only people who can be on them have to look like Lyle Alzato. When Palmeiro was questioned, everyone said, "no, he's too small." Turns out he was on Winstrol, or "Winnie Z" - a steroid that is available in safe form for pennies (to an athlete) that makes you gain a little solid lean muscle, but massively aids your explosiveness. There's this NBA free pass, as if nobody would ever do it. Why? If I was Ben Wallace in college and I had no thoughts that I'd ever possibly in my entire life even be close to thinking about being good enough not to get pissed on on an NBA court, I'd take the cow roids and gain 40 pounds of jack and make my game a muscle game. 

And to be clear, I watched Jordan in 95. He had lost 3.5 steps from 89, not "a step." When I saw him in 96 I suspected HIM of designer roid and HGH use. I suspected Karl Malone of use. But the NBA has this presumption that it could never happen. That guys who make 10 million a year would never buy a years worth of unbelievable designer roids and HGH for about $50,000 LMFAO. 

Look, if Isiah, Michael or whoever were born in 1983, they would have been eating hormone laden beef and chicken their whole lives. Do you realize that children are larger than ever and kids are going into puberty at ages averaging 2.5 years earlier in some states? My nephews parents are small people. So are all his grandparents. He never lifted a weight in his life and he was 6'2" 260 entering freshman football. I was shocked to find out he wouldn't be playing offensive line because he was the 7th biggest kid trying out! 

Sadly I think that if Michael was just entering the league, he'd probably shoot up to 235, ironically about a year after he made enough money to easily afford some HGH. And it's sad. Because you have guys who are averaging 29 PPG in the NBA finals, and yet Potash rights that the things Westbrook are doing almost obscure you from how full of key mistakes his game is. 

It's a trade off. Guys like Sefolosha who can defend but can't BUY an open jumper would not be playing in finals in 1987. The best players in the game would not be making some of the mistakes some Thunder players have made. Missed rotations, jumping into three point shooters, unforced dribbles off of feet, missed dunks.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Dre said:


> Why he always playing the "I don't care how much these people love you" card..what does that have to do with anything


Because in the beginning of the first thread when I argued basketball with you, what I got back was "hey, dre is a big contributor around here."

Anyway, this is yet ANOTHER example of me posting basketball and you posting hoodey. Mods? Am I going to get warned for this exchange lol?


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

Fun thread to read... some of these posts are flat out wrong on both ends of the argument.

Would a "Dream Team" of today beat the original dream team? No. It would be fun to watch, but they wouldn't win. The "team" part is missing in todays basketball. To much "me" and "money..." 

The faults of the original Dream Team were small. Bird was at the end of his career, but he only had to play limited minutes for a summer, not an 82 game schedule. Magic was aged and out of basketball already, but fortunately for him, speed and athleticism isn't what made him a great player. The original Dream Team also would have trouble with strong, quick PG's...(Rose, Westbrook...) But with Malone, Chuck, DRob and Ewing waiting in the wings, those guys would have a harder time finishing around the rim.

Basketball has changed, players that are taller and bigger are also quicker and can handle the ball much better... but in the grand scheme...that doesn't matter as much. It's not like we are comparing the guys of today to the players of the 40's and 50's...because then, yes, as great as basketball was then as a TEAM sport, the athletic advantage would overtake that... but not from just 20 years ago. 

Pippen and Jordan were 2 of the best defenders to ever play the game. People mention Durant and him being a match-up problem. Why? Size? He's 6'9" and skinny as hell. He could shoot from the parking lot... You don't think Pippen could slow him down? Pippen was quicker and stronger, not much shorter with a massive wing span.

LBJ and Wade?? Those guys are on the same team today and don't look that impressive together... How are they going to stack up against some of the best ever...

Finally, in the post is where the Dream Team would eventually wear down todays NBA. Howard would be begging for help... because after him, and maybe Bynum, the size just isn't there. DRob and Ewing for their size, were athletic as hell and quick. Dwight is too, and even more explosive, but he would have no help. Then the PF position would make this even more one sided. Charles and Karl. Who is going to guard them in todays NBA?


----------



## JoeyJoJo (May 2, 2012)

Thomas is definitely a better basketball player. Russ is still super young with a lot of room for improvement.

To be honest, I don't even know what this discussion is about. I skipped over most of it.

But steroids and HGH and all that don't actually bother me. I wouldn't care if everybody did them. Because monster home runs and guys jumping over defenders is fun. And I like fun.


----------



## Flyer75 (Aug 29, 2009)

e-monk said:


> Dwight Howard is a great example of this chauvanistic attitude towards the past - he's neither as big nor is he maybe as athletic as Robinson was
> 
> and that's before you even start talking about skill set


I didn't read this whole thread, are you saying there are actually people comparing Dwight Howard to David Robinson and Patrick Ewing, and they are posting on a basketball message board????? :lol:


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> The reason I say it's a wash is that he jumps higher and is bigger, but nobody had feet as quick as Zeke's.
> 
> But as a BASKETBALL player is he better? I think everyone since about 02, all the athleticism whores who don't realize it's HGH, roids and hormones in the food (the only thing left over is whey protein and weight machines, since scientists are emphatic that you don't evolve as a human race in 25 or even 100 years) also don't realize that it's a game of skill. If it was just track and field, fine.
> 
> ...


You morphed your argument again. First you said players aren't more athletic than they were 20 years ago. Now you are saying they are but it's because of roids.

Do you not do this on purpose? Really?


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

I like that he says the best Jordan was 1989 Jordan, after criticizing the current players for not being great winners like Jordan.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

JoeyJoJo said:


> But steroids and HGH and all that don't actually bother me. I wouldn't care if everybody did them. Because monster home runs and guys jumping over defenders is fun. And I like fun.


I think we need to stop treating sports like politics. This doesn't actually matter, it's for our entertainment, and it's not like a drug is actually taking a shot or shuffling its feet, it's still a person. I think drugs should be allowed in sports, just like breast implants are allowed in Playboy.


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

That team was the best morphing of Basketeball skill and ability we will ever see. Players may be incredible athletes today but they are more managed robots by the man. The guys on this team were straight ballers...nuff said.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> I think we need to stop treating sports like politics. This doesn't actually matter, *it's for our entertainment, and it's not like a drug is actually taking a shot or shuffling its feet, it's still a person. * I think drugs should be allowed in sports, just like breast implants are allowed in Playboy.


This form of "entertainment" already exists. Ut's called wrestling. 

In no way, shape of form drugs should be allowed in sports.


----------



## Sleepepro (Oct 24, 2008)

The reason that the dream team is considered too hard to replicate is the fact that when the players were selected we saw some of the greatest collection of talent while also at around the same age. Its impossible with this generation, Duncan, Garnett, Kobe, and Kidd are from a different generation than the current olympic team. If those guys were 5-7 years younger then I think it could be possible to duplicate in terms of talent.

Kidd/Paul/Williams or Rose
Kobe/Wade
LeBron/Durant/Anthony
Duncan/Garnett
Dwight/Bynum

and all at their prime could challenge that dream team


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

Except for the fact that the dream team is better at every position against that lineup.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Hyperion said:


> Except for the fact that the dream team is better at every position against that lineup.


2012 LeBron is much better than a broken down Bird. If it was an '86 Larry, sure, but it wasn't. And a prime Tim Duncan is easily the best big on either team with Kevin Garnett arguably being the second best. So yeah.


----------



## doctordrizzay (May 10, 2011)

2012 Lebron is better than any of those players except MJ


----------



## Sleepepro (Oct 24, 2008)

Hyperion said:


> Except for the fact that the dream team is better at every position against that lineup.


Don't think so, the 92 team would have an advantage at the SG and C position but would get destroyed in the PG position. SF position I would give to the newer team and the PF position would almost be a wash if it wasn't for the fact that Prime Duncan and Garnett would give Barley and Malone fits. 

The PF battle would be the most fun match up to watch, those 4 PF's are basically best of all time PF's.


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

Luke said:


> 2012 LeBron is much better than a broken down Bird. If it was an '86 Larry, sure, but it wasn't. And a prime Tim Duncan is easily the best big on either team with Kevin Garnett arguably being the second best. So yeah.


Oh, didn't realize you were fully taking advantage of a time machine.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Hyperion said:


> Oh, didn't realize you were fully taking advantage of a time machine.


I'm pretty sure that's what the poster that you originally replied to meant. Maybe I'm wrong.


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

Yeah. I got that, but then you'd have to make everyone a prime version of themselves.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Jamel Irief said:


> You morphed your argument again. First you said players aren't more athletic than they were 20 years ago. Now you are saying they are but it's because of roids.
> 
> Do you not do this on purpose? Really?


I said players, on average, were better track and field athletes than today? Nope. Never would say that.

Today's athletes are marginally better naturally. When you see Horace Grant being known as being ahead of his time in terms of an aggressive weight room routine, and gaining 10 lbs. over the course of a decade-plus career, I'm sorry - a 65 to 40 lb. gain by Lebron James in just a few years doesn't say "natural" to me.

Are today's players better basketball players? No. A lot of unforced errors in the Finals. Mostly by the Thunder.

Today's players could not beat yesterdays players. For one, there's a big difference in post play. Back then you had actual post footwork that led to easy offense and better spacing. And nobody today is going to just "out-athlete" Hakeem, David, Ewing and O'neal, sorry. But what's missing today is the footwork to even allow for any physical edge in the paint by centers. Dwight Howard has no footwork. Bynum's is okay. He kind of reminds me of half Ewing half Kevin Duckworth though. Or Shaq with no athleticism.

Do you have any other questions?


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Nimreitz said:


> I like that he says the best Jordan was 1989 Jordan, after criticizing the current players for not being great winners like Jordan.


Jordan was ready to win in 1989. He faced a great team in the Pistons with two guys who were 22... Pippen and Grant. Do you know of a lot of winners who are going to take a 22 year old raw Pippen and beat a team like the 89 Pistons.

This is the problem. You think you know what you're talking about but you just don't. You're falling into the logic that the Bulls weren't good enough to win because of Jordan's deficiencies, when this just isn't the case. 

Here are Jordan's numbers v. the Pistons in 89

29.6 PPG 5.5 RPG 6.5 APG 2.0 SPG 0.5 BPG 45.9% FG 75.9% FT

Yeah, clearly the reason they lost the series lol. If there is one thing that wasn't Jordanesque I see in there it's the very Kobe Bryant-like 45.9% FG. Jordan shot 53.9% in the regular season in 89. But isn't 45.9% by Bryant a reason to have a circle jerk amongst the modernists?

Now, PIPPEN, the guy that everyone likes to hold up to somehow damage Jordan ("he had Pippen, it was so easy), averaged:

9.6 PPG 3.0 APG

So a 22 year old Pippen averaging 9.6 and 3.0 isn't going to help anyone at any time beat the 89 Pistons.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Nimreitz said:


> I think we need to stop treating sports like politics. This doesn't actually matter, it's for our entertainment, and it's not like a drug is actually taking a shot or shuffling its feet, it's still a person. I think drugs should be allowed in sports, just like breast implants are allowed in Playboy.


But the drug is the difference. Now I'm a big believer that MJ took performance enhancers from 96-98. There's literally no way you could:

a) Watch him in 95
b) Consider that in 96 you could get safe roids and HGH for less than 1% of his salary, and good stuff at that
c) Watch how much better he was athletically in 96

And conclude he wasn't.

But in his prime he was most likely not on them. Magic wasn't etc.

So, if you take the athletic difference between Lebron if he doesn't do HGH and roids and Lebron if he does, it's the DRUGS that account for the difference, not Lebron. 

And when you're talking about less skilled players and saying "but he's 280 and jumps as high as Jordan." Okay, a 25 year old Jordan would be 235, still way quicker than Lebron and jump higher than Lebron. And he'd still have the ball skills in the air that Lebron will never have.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Luke said:


> 2012 LeBron is much better than a broken down Bird. If it was an '86 Larry, sure, but it wasn't. And a prime Tim Duncan is easily the best big on either team with Kevin Garnett arguably being the second best. So yeah.


But Tim Duncan isn't in his prime...


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Sleepepro said:


> Don't think so, the 92 team would have an advantage at the SG and C position but would get destroyed in the PG position. SF position I would give to the newer team and the PF position would almost be a wash if it wasn't for the fact that Prime Duncan and Garnett would give Barley and Malone fits.
> 
> The PF battle would be the most fun match up to watch, those 4 PF's are basically best of all time PF's.


A ridiculous advantage at C and SG, and that's all you need. You have the best player ever in his prime against an aging Kobe Bryant or a player in Wade that he'd destroy at any age. 

And an advantage like Robinson v. Howard can cripple the team with the disadvantage.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> Jordan was ready to win in 1989. He faced a great team in the Pistons with two guys who were 22... Pippen and Grant. Do you know of a lot of winners who are going to take a 22 year old raw Pippen and beat a team like the 89 Pistons.
> 
> This is the problem. You think you know what you're talking about but you just don't. You're falling into the logic that the Bulls weren't good enough to win because of Jordan's deficiencies, when this just isn't the case.
> 
> ...


its funny that you feel putting up some Mj stats prove he wasn't the reason the bulls lost even though his stats were significantly lower against the pistons were significantly worse than his regular season stats ....but earlier in this thread you spoke of trumpeting stats in losses... when it was Shaq and shaq's were actually slightly better.

guess that doesn't apply in the hoodey hypocrisyland.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Hoodey said:


> Jordan was ready to win in 1989.


LOL, okie dokie. Well Durant and Westbrook are "ready to win" now, and the rest of the team already has.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Da Grinch said:


> its funny that you feel putting up some Mj stats prove he wasn't the reason the bulls lost even though his stats were significantly lower against the pistons were significantly worse than his regular season stats ....but earlier in this thread you spoke of trumpeting stats in losses... when it was Shaq and shaq's were actually slightly better.
> 
> guess that doesn't apply in the hoodey hypocrisyland.


Dude you're still upset that you got your face rubbed in the mud over your terrible Wilt Chamberlain arguments. Please, go worship Carmelo Anthony with someone who gives a crap. 

The argument about Shaq wasn't that he was the reason Orlando lost. I was explaining that when I said the "Bulls handled him" I'm pretty sure that they knew he was going to get his and they did what they had to do to get the sweep. 

The argument about Shaq was how the 96 Bulls got the job done. And they did, they moved on. 

I'm saying Jordan was good in 89, just like Shaq was good in 96. But the Pistons handled Jordan because they got the win. 

Should a team with 3 hall of famers AND Laimbeer, Aguirre, Salley and Johnson handle Jordan when Pippen is 22. Yes. And I'm not a hypocrite because I'll be the first to say that they handled him, because the WIN is what matters.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Nimreitz said:


> LOL, okie dokie. Well Durant and Westbrook are "ready to win" now, and the rest of the team already has.


Durant needs to get more stout defensively and work on being harder to move off of a spot, but other than that I'd say he is ready. 

Would Durant win against the 89 Pistons if he had a 25 year old Pippen? He'd have a good shot if he gained 10 lbs. or so. Would he win with Pippen at 22? No. Would Lebron? No. Would Magic? No.

Is that the only reply you have to all of that?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> Dude you're still upset that you got your face rubbed in the mud over your terrible Wilt Chamberlain arguments. Please, go worship Carmelo Anthony with someone who gives a crap.
> 
> The argument about Shaq wasn't that he was the reason Orlando lost. I was explaining that when I said the "Bulls handled him" I'm pretty sure that they knew he was going to get his and they did what they had to do to get the sweep.
> 
> ...


lol.

its funny because i watch you go back on your own arguments all the time.

jordan was ready to win ....but the pistons handled him because pippen was 23....yeah.

if the win is all that matters why make excuses?

maybe you should go to that durant vs james thread you made and make a few more excuses.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Hoodey said:


> Would Durant win against the 89 Pistons if he had a 25 year old Pippen? He'd have a good shot if he gained 10 lbs. or so. Would he win with Pippen at 22? No. Would Lebron? No. Would Magic? No.


Did Jordan? No. Great point.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Da Grinch said:


> lol.
> 
> its funny because i watch you go back on your own arguments all the time.
> 
> ...


It's not an excuse lol. Scottie Pippen averaged 9 and 3 in the series.

What's so hilarious is that the whole thing about giving Jordan grief for losing to Detroit came from...

The PRO BIRD AND MAGIC media, who were threatened by MJ from day one. You would think that now that everyone unanimously considers him the best ever, there wouldn't still be mouth-breathers out there retreading Bob Ryan's Jordan take from 1989.


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Nimreitz said:


> Did Jordan? No. Great point.


No, he didn't win. But nobody would.

Now, did Jordan lose any series in his career in a full season that was as indefensible as Lebron's lost to Dallas? In which he performed so badly on an individual basis?


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Hoodey said:


> But Tim Duncan isn't in his prime...


It might actually be a good idea to read the thread before you start quoting people. Just a tip.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Hoodey said:


> No, he didn't win. But nobody would.
> 
> Now, did Jordan lose any series in his career in a full season that was as indefensible as Lebron's lost to Dallas? In which he performed so badly on an individual basis?


You mean aside from the entire 80s? How about when he came back in #45?


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Hoodey said:


> It's not an excuse lol. Scottie Pippen averaged 9 and 3 in the series.
> 
> What's so hilarious is that the whole thing about giving Jordan grief for losing to Detroit came from...
> 
> The PRO BIRD AND MAGIC media, who were threatened by MJ from day one. You would think that now that everyone unanimously considers him the best ever, there wouldn't still be mouth-breathers out there retreading Bob Ryan's Jordan take from 1989.


Bro, the only problem here is you doing the EXACT SAME THING to LeBron. No one here is dissing Jordan, that's a strawman that your crazy head invented.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Whos is ready to not to call Jordan the greatest ever? Anyone? I'm fired up and ready to make a bunch of arguements I will later contradict 60 posts from now.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

meh, he's definitely in the conversation


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

e-monk said:


> meh, he's definitely in the conversation


Yeah, i've never read an all-time list who hasn't Jordan Top-3


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

I was going to say more like top 10


----------



## ~Styles~ (May 1, 2006)

Yeh I think I would be struggling to name 15 players better than him tbh.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

I'd say he's safely in the top three. I wouldn't really feel the need to argue with anyone who said he was the best ever, like others have said, he's certainly in the conversation.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

~Styles~ said:


> Yeh I think I would be struggling to name 15 players better than him tbh.


I thought we were considering only ACTIVE players and Ol' Baldy...


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

for the most part the who's the greatest arguments are for the birds.

almost no one says a guy is the greatest while he's at his best .

all those accolades come when he is on the downside of his career towards the end when people feel the need to run through his resume of accomplishments.

its a method that doesn't translate in any other genre or sport...but somehow its vogue in the nba.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

anone get a chance to read this?

http://msn.foxsports.com/olympics/s...-stockton-chris-mullin-because-of-race-062712


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

roux2dope said:


> anone get a chance to read this?
> 
> http://msn.foxsports.com/olympics/s...-stockton-chris-mullin-because-of-race-062712


There are at least two guys in the media whose opinions i don't even care to read, because of it's racist content: Scoop and Whitlock's.


----------



## eazy8o5 (May 15, 2010)

roux2dope said:


> anone get a chance to read this?
> 
> http://msn.foxsports.com/olympics/s...-stockton-chris-mullin-because-of-race-062712


in 1992 i do believe stockton had surpassed isiah as the better pg


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

roux2dope said:


> anone get a chance to read this?
> 
> http://msn.foxsports.com/olympics/s...-stockton-chris-mullin-because-of-race-062712


Good lord, I just read nothing but garbage...


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

OneBadLT123 said:


> Good lord, I just read nothing but garbage...


Its total garbage.. i just threw it out there for the hell of it.. i cant stand whitlock but when i read the title of the article i couldnt resist reading it.... i guess that what the asshole wanted


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

you could actually make a pretty strong case for Stockton in 1992 - at that point he'd lead the league in assists for 5 straight years and had been named to the all nba 2nd team (behind Magic, not Zeke) in 88, 89, 90, and 92 (with a 3rd team ranking in 91) -and Zeke was last named to any all nba team at any tier in 87

so whether you like that as a measure of anything else, it is a pretty strong measure of the relative esteem each player was held in by peers and media well before anyone thought about an Olympic Dream Team


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

Wasnt mullin first team all nba in 91-92 as well, not worthy or nique


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

e-monk said:


> you could actually make a pretty strong case for Stockton in 1992 - at that point he'd lead the league in assists for 5 straight years and had been named to the all nba 2nd team (behind Magic, not Zeke) in 88, 89, 90, and 92 (with a 3rd team ranking in 91) -and Zeke was last named to any all nba team at any tier in 87
> 
> so whether you like that as a measure of anything else, it is a pretty strong measure of the relative esteem each player was held in by peers and media well before anyone thought about an Olympic Dream Team


Tim Hardaway was actually considered a better point guard than Zeke as well at that point.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

e-monk said:


> you could actually make a pretty strong case for Stockton in 1992 - at that point he'd lead the league in assists for 5 straight years and had been named to the all nba 2nd team (behind Magic, not Zeke) in 88, 89, 90, and 92 (with a 3rd team ranking in 91) -and Zeke was last named to any all nba team at any tier in 87
> 
> so whether you like that as a measure of anything else, it is a pretty strong measure of the relative esteem each player was held in by peers and media well before anyone thought about an Olympic Dream Team


not that i'm a big conspiracy theorist , but it always seemed obvious that thomas was better than stockton between 88-91(he got hurt in 91 after the selection for the dream team was done, after that point you could make a decent argument that stockton was the better player), but that the media basically blacked him out of awards after his infamous comment about them in the 87 playoffs when he agreed with Rodman that if bird was black he'd be just another good player.

the next year no piston made an all nba team or won a post season award despite the 3rd best record in the nba , winning their division and making the finals.

in 88-89 no member of the pistons made an all-nba team or won a post season award despite winning the title.

and its not like this is a no name cast it has 3 HOF's on the team plus lambeer and dantley who were multiple time all stars

the media by and large took great offense at rodman's comment and put the onus for this on thomas ...even though at this point in bird's career it was true and he admitted as much in that book he wrote with magic(that when he hurt his back following the 86 finals he was never the same player again), but they weren't ready to accept it yet , so they belittled rodman's opinion basically calling him sore loser/rookie who was too naive to know what he was saying...even though once again he was right...and painted thomas as essentially an evil man/borderline racist.

its unheard of for a team at the top of the nba be shut out like that , and after they were defending champions only then was dumars granted a 3rd team all nba and rodman got a DPOY


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

in 1991 Zeke logged 16ppg 9apg on 43%/29% shooting and Stockton logged 17ppg 14apg on 51%/34% shooting - tell me again how Zeke was obviously better at the time


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

There wouldn't be a Dream Team if Thomas was on the team. Magic, Bird and Jordan had their own problem with Thomas and outright stated that they wouldn't be on the team if Thomas was selected.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Da Grinch said:


> in 88-89 no member of the pistons made an all-nba team or won a post season award despite winning the title.



both Rodman and Joe D were first team all D and seriously what Piston including Zeke merited more than that? they werent a team of stars and it was the age of Mike, Magic, and Larry (i.e. an era of transcendent superstars) - what set the Pistons apart was chemistry and team play not some transcendent star - they were known as the Bad Boys because they had to develop a scrapping physical style of play to counter transcendent stars - they didnt have one and that includes Zeke

the closest they came to having that kind of guy in a historical sense was Dantley but he was only transcendent (30ppg on 56% shooting) 5 or 6 years earlier when he was member of the Jazz by the time he was a piston he was diminished as was Zeke by the time the Pistons were winning titles and Joe D didnt really ascend until a couple years later

the pistons were a team gig (much like their 2003-2004 incarnation)


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Hyperion said:


> There wouldn't be a Dream Team if Thomas was on the team. Magic, Bird and Jordan had their own problem with Thomas and outright stated that they wouldn't be on the team if Thomas was selected.


Link?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

e-monk said:


> in 1991 Zeke logged 16ppg 9apg on 43%/29% shooting and Stockton logged 17ppg 14apg on 51%/34% shooting - tell me again how Zeke was obviously better at the time


because he was .

it was understood at the time that stockton's numbers were inflated to some degree and not a true indication of his actual worth.

it was also understood that thomas numbers where deflated because he was blending his talents with a good team around him

if you took stockton at the value of those #s he would be considered the best pg of that time .
those #s are better than magic's and if you used those stats to make that case you would be brushed off simply as a fool .

also thomas was considered the pistons best player and his team was a 2 time champion as recently as 1990, try as you might stockton was considered no where near that caliber of player until the mid-late 90's if ever when the jazz were considered true title contenders, thomas fell off from that sort of recognition after he suffered a serious injury in 1991.

and even after that thomas dropped 44 on stockton in a game during the 91-92 season widely considered proof that he was still better despite being snubbed for the dream team, it seemed he would have done it again in their 2nd meeting until karl malone flagrantly fouled him and took him out the game in the 1st quareter .


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

e-monk said:


> both Rodman and Joe D were first team all D and seriously what Piston including Zeke merited more than that? they werent a team of stars and it was the age of Mike, Magic, and Larry (i.e. an era of transcendent superstars) - what set the Pistons apart was chemistry and team play not some transcendent star - they were known as the Bad Boys because they had to develop a scrapping physical style of play to counter transcendent stars - they didnt have one and that includes Zeke
> 
> the closest they came to having that kind of guy in a historical sense was Dantley but he was only transcendent (30ppg on 56% shooting) 5 or 6 years earlier when he was member of the Jazz by the time he was a piston he was diminished as was Zeke by the time the Pistons were winning titles and Joe D didnt really ascend until a couple years later
> 
> the pistons were a team gig (much like their 2003-2004 incarnation)


thomas was all nba 1st team 3 times and 2nd team once the 4 preceding years to that comment.

he was in fact a superstar at that time.

that you dont know that kind of ends this discussion.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Da Grinch said:


> because he was .
> 
> it was understood at the time that stockton's numbers were inflated to some degree and not a true indication of his actual worth.


really? please - stop making stuff up - I was alive at the time 



> it was also understood that thomas numbers where deflated because he was blending his talents with a good team around him


no it really wasnt - that's Magic - Zeke was lead scorer, period. he could take as many shots as he wanted - the only other serious scorer on his team was Joe D - in fact in the early 90s aside from Zeke the only guys playing more than 30mpg were Joe D and Rodman - evverything else was cobbled together

the only way his stats were nerfed is that Daly turned the team into grinders because he had no one including Zeke who could hang with the transcendent guys in an up and down contest



> if you took stockton at the value of those #s he would be considered the best pg of that time .
> those #s are better than magic's and if you used those stats to make that case you would be brushed off simply as a fool .


actually no they're not better than Magic's, Johnson was scoring 20ppg and pulling down 6 or 7 rebounds along with 12 apg - again I was alive at the time, so stop making stuff up



> also thomas was considered the pistons best player and his team was a 2 time champion as recently as 1990, try as you might stockton was considered no where near that caliber of player until the mid-late 90's if ever when the jazz were considered true title contenders, thomas fell off from that sort of recognition after he suffered a serious injury in 1991.


Thomas was considered their best player much the same way that Billups was both the 03-04 champion's best player and arguably not a top 10 player that season - he was the best of a good bunch that was well designed and executed but not a transcendent player carrying his team in his own right

by 91 Zeke was neither of those things and there were a number of PGs including KJ, Hardaway and Mark Price that had surpassed him as his game faded - Zeke was arguably a top tier player for a few seasons in the early to mid 80s - by the time the stones were winning titles he was at the tail of his prime - still capable of being explosive, still very good but not a top 10 player and by 91-92? no


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Da Grinch said:


> thomas was all nba 1st team 3 times and 2nd team once the 4 preceding years to that comment.
> 
> he was in fact a superstar at that time.
> 
> that you dont know that kind of ends this discussion.


was the dream team selected in 1985? no it wasnt - the dream team was selected 6 years later - maybe you think they should have had Bill Russell on the dream team? he was pretty good previously too

jesus, 'end of discussion'? yeah no kidding - you think 6 year old accolades should supplant contemporary ones of similar merit for nomination? then yeah I think we're done here - Wilt was still alive at the time - maybe they should have put him on the team instead of Christian Laettner?


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

e-monk said:


> was the dream team selected in 1985? no it wasnt - the dream team was selected 6 years later - maybe you think they should have had Bill Russell on the dream team? he was pretty good previously too
> 
> jesus, 'end of discussion'? yeah no kidding - you think 6 year old accolades should supplant contemporary ones of similar merit for nomination? then yeah I think we're done here - Wilt was still alive at the time - maybe they should have put him on the team instead of Christian Laettner?


All right, monk, if you stand by the best "current" players should have been selected to the Dream Team (i believe that's the argument between Zeke and Stockton) than do you agree with the selections of Larry Bird (crippled) and Magic Johnson (retired)?

And with the selection of a Jamaican?

And with the selection of Laettner?


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

I was young, but paying attention to basketball at the time... John Stockton was on the ascent and Isiah Thomas was on the descent. I really like Isiah as a player and respect what he did, but Stockton was a guy on the rise at the time and the Jazz were arguably the better team... they'd come off of 54 and 55 win seasons and were just as relevant as the aging bad boys... the Pistons got bounced in the first round by the Knicks in '92, I think... 

I get that Isiah got snubbed from a legacy perspective, but man, people don't respect John Stockton enough.


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

PauloCatarino said:


> Link?


Google it. Isiah insinuated Magic was gay after he got hiv and was one if the players calling for him not being allowed to play. Isiah and Jordan didn't get along from the bad boy days and he actually said no Isiah. Bird also had no respect for him. He and magic were/are close friends.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

e-monk said:


> was the dream team selected in 1985? no it wasnt - the dream team was selected 6 years later - maybe you think they should have had Bill Russell on the dream team? he was pretty good previously too
> 
> jesus, 'end of discussion'? yeah no kidding - you think 6 year old accolades should supplant contemporary ones of similar merit for nomination? then yeah I think we're done here - Wilt was still alive at the time - maybe they should have put him on the team instead of Christian Laettner?


you proved your knowledge when you said the closest they had to a transcendent star was adrian dantley ....its sad you thought that and know you are trying to act like you knew something you clearly dont .

all the smart alec comments in the world cant change what is obvious about your understanding of that time.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Hyperion said:


> Google it. Isiah insinuated Magic was gay after he got hiv and was one if the players calling for him not being allowed to play. Isiah and Jordan didn't get along from the bad boy days and he actually said no Isiah. Bird also had no respect for him. He and magic were/are close friends.


thomas has denied that he said that pretty strongly , in fact he has gone so far as to say because he had a brother died of that disease he knew better.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

PauloCatarino said:


> All right, monk, if you stand by the best "current" players should have been selected to the Dream Team (i believe that's the argument between Zeke and Stockton) than do you agree with the selections of Larry Bird (crippled) and Magic Johnson (retired)?


Magic was still one of the 3 or 4 best players on the team (and in the world) at the time (he had been named league MVP as recently as 1990, a little more than a year before they started thinking about the roster) 

Larry on the other hand was a little more iffy but he was still playing at near all star levels (and was still better than Zeke at that point) 

and if anyone was going to get in on legacy it would be him - and do you really want to compare Zeke's legacy with that of either of these guys in the first place? it's not comparable, it's not even close



> And with the selection of a Jamaican?


are you referring to Ewing? he was naturalized by the time he was in college and anyway Im not sure what that has to do with the argument at hand - different position and Ewing was clearly better and in his prime



> And with the selection of Laettner?


was Zeke still in college? you can question why they felt the need to bring a college guy on board and I personally think it was silly but that's the way they went - again I dont see what this has to do with the Zeke v Stockton question 

in fact none of your points are truly relevant if the original question was 'why Stockton and not Zeke' but if you do want to widen the scope the answer remains the same - they (with the clear exception of Laettner who was there programmatically) were all better than Zeke at the time of selection


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Da Grinch said:


> you proved your knowledge when you said the closest they had to a transcendent star was adrian dantley ....its sad you thought that and know you are trying to act like you knew something you clearly dont .
> 
> all the smart alec comments in the world cant change what is obvious about your understanding of that time.


Im content with that and it holds for anyone that counts as appropriate in my esteem 

now do you know anything about Dantley and his career? do you think that that through some temporal vortex the olympic committee should have evaluated Thomas as if he was the player he was in 1985? 

I have intuited your answers to these questions and others from your earlier responses and it would seem you dont qualify in the terms of the first clause - have a nice night


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Dornado said:


> I was young, but paying attention to basketball at the time... John Stockton was on the ascent and Isiah Thomas was on the descent. I really like Isiah as a player and respect what he did, but Stockton was a guy on the rise at the time and the Jazz were arguably the better team... they'd come off of 54 and 55 win seasons and were just as relevant as the aging bad boys... the Pistons got bounced in the first round by the Knicks in '92, I think...
> 
> I get that Isiah got snubbed from a legacy perspective, but man, people don't respect John Stockton enough.


 they made the selections in summer of 91, the pistons were defending champs until 2 months earlier and their season ended in losing in the conference finals to the eventual champions chicago bulls, they still had a good claim on being the nba's 2nd or 3rd best team , they were clearly the better team at that point...and for all the talk about acscent and descent , thomas is only 11 months older than stockton, alot of stockton's respect comes from being such a good player for such a long time , that really wasn't the case yet, at that point he was still lumped in with upstart pg talent of that time period (KJ tim hardaway mark price even though he was older because he only became a full time starter in 87) thomas was above that, he was playing for his place in history.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Stockton got more MVP votes in the 90-91 season... and the 89-90 season... and the 88-89 season... maybe this is the anti-Isiah conspiracy, but I think it is fair to say that Stockton was pretty well respected at the time. 

.... and I love Mark Price, but you're stretching that top tier by including him in 1991... he was an efficient PG and an all-star but there was never really a time when people considered him among the top 3 PGs in the league.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

e-monk said:


> Im content with that and it holds for anyone that counts as appropriate in my esteem
> 
> now do you know anything about Dantley and his career? do you think that that through some temporal vortex the olympic committee should have evaluated Thomas as if he was the player he was in 1985?
> 
> I have intuited your answers to these questions and others from your earlier responses and it would seem you dont qualify in the terms of the first clause - have a nice night


that the closest thing the pistons had to a transcendent star was ....Dantley.

not thomas who was a 12 time all star
not dumars or rodman who were hall of famers ....

but Dantley ....he put up nice numbers and usually didn't make the playoffs in doing so

your fine with that , good .

i'm fine with the fact that 13 months before the olympic committee snubbed thomas he was the best player on the world's best team, knocking out several dream teamers in the process ...dislike it if you want but thats a fact , that after a comment is made that insults the basketball media he is no longer voted by them into elite status despite he is at the time 1 month past his 26th birthday and his team would reach the nba's final round 3 times winning twice. that somehow his game has fallen despite he should have been entering his prime and his team is ascending.

yeah it happens all the time.

good night.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Dornado said:


> Stockton got more MVP votes in the 90-91 season... and the 89-90 season... and the 88-89 season... maybe this is the anti-Isiah conspiracy, but I think it is fair to say that Stockton was pretty well respected at the time.
> 
> .... and I love Mark Price, but you're stretching that top tier by including him in 1991... he was an efficient PG and an all-star but there was never really a time when people considered him among the top 3 PGs in the league.


mark price was all nba 1st team in 1993

all 3rd team in 1989 , 1992 and 1994

he only played 16 games in the 90-91 season

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pricema01.html

mark price was highly touted at the time...but unlike stockton it didn't last very long

thats why stockton is a HOF and price is not

as a point of reference in those 5 years 89-94

price 1 1st team 3 3rd teams
stockton 1 1st team 3 2nd team 1 3rd team selection
kj 3 2nd team 1 3rd team (he only played 49 games in the 92-93 season so he didn't get selected that season)

i remember them being similarly regarded at the time and i posted as much.

not trying to stretch anything.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

those are fair points about Price, but I still don't remember people including him in the Magic/Isiah/Stockton tier. I admit, I was young. 

Anyway, I'm not so much arguing that Thomas wasn't snubbed, as I am arguing that Stockton was a logical choice for the team.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Dornado said:


> those are fair points about Price, but I still don't remember people including him in the Magic/Isiah/Stockton tier. I admit, I was young.
> 
> Anyway, I'm not so much arguing that Thomas wasn't snubbed, as I am arguing that Stockton was a logical choice for the team.


price's team was considered more of an ensemble cast though daugherty and price were considered the cream of that team along with harper williams and nance...but his team won and they were at one point considered possible legit heirs to the titles. and with team success often comes individual recognition

i honestly dont think stockton shouldn't have made the team ...but he shouldn't have been in at the expense of thomas. there was enough room on a 12 team roster for 2 pg sized point guards since magic obviously doesn't guard them.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> price's team was considered more of an ensemble cast though daugherty and price were considered the cream of that team along with harper williams and nance...but his team won and they were at one point considered possible legit heirs to the titles. and with team success often comes individual recognition
> 
> i honestly dont think stockton shouldn't have made the team ...but he shouldn't have been in at the expense of thomas. there was enough room on a 12 team roster for 2 pg sized point guards since magic obviously doesn't guard them.


Yeah, those Cavs teams are part of some of my first basketball memories (watching games in Chicago growing up). I remember thinking that Price/Harper/Daugherty were the best of that ensemble, but it is remarkable how productive Nance was even as he was entering his 30s. I feel like people forget that MJ's clutch wins over the Cavs actually meant something.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Dornado said:


> Yeah, those Cavs teams are part of some of my first basketball memories (watching games in Chicago growing up). I remember thinking that Price/Harper/Daugherty were the best of that ensemble, but it is remarkable how productive Nance was even as he was entering his 30s. I feel like people forget that MJ's clutch wins over the Cavs actually meant something.


yeah...the bulls were underdogs in that series , but if they lost that series , they could have made changes that could have changed the bulls future ...conversely , if the cavs had won they may not have traded harper which was a huge mistake.


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

Da Grinch said:


> thomas has denied that he said that pretty strongly , in fact he has gone so far as to say because he had a brother died of that disease he knew better.


Doesn't change the fact that Magic believed that at the time. Also, Magic wasn't a smack addict so Isiah could only think of one other way....


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Hyperion said:


> Doesn't change the fact that Magic believed that at the time. Also, Magic wasn't a smack addict so Isiah could only think of one other way....


I dont doubt magic believed it . but for the whole situation i kind of blame magic for it .

if he's really your friend you dont take other people word for it you ask them about it ,

instead he holds a silent grudge, does dirty stuff behind his back and releases a book about it almost 20 years later ...i expected better from johnson than that.

here is Thomas' side of that story



> "I'm really hurt, and I really feel taken advantage of for all these years,'' said Thomas, the Hall of Fame point guard and former NBA coach and executive, most recently with the Knicks. "I'm totally blindsided by this. Every time that I've seen Magic, he has been friendly with me. Whenever he came to a Knick game, he was standing in the tunnel [to the locker room] with me. He and [Knicks assistant coach] Herb [Williams] and I, we would go out to dinner in New York. I didn't know he felt this way.''
> 
> The criticisms are made by Johnson in When the Game Was Ours, which he co-wrote with Larry Bird and author Jackie MacMullan. The book, to be released on Nov. 4, tells the inside story of the most important rivalry in basketball history.
> 
> ...


Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/ian_thomsen/10/22/isiah.magic/index.html#ixzz1zSvbTODh


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Nimreitz said:


> You mean aside from the entire 80s? How about when he came back in #45?


You don't know what you're talking about.

Here were Lebron's statistics against the 2011 Mavericks, who had one hall of famer in anything close to his prime.

*17.8 PPG* 7.2 RPG 6.8 APG 1.7 SPG 0.5 BPG 47.8% FG *60.0% FT*

The bolded numbers are indefensible when compared to Jordan in any loss. The 47.8% FG% is underwhelming, but hardly terrible. 

Here are Jordan's losses in his career:

1985 Milwaukee Bucks 59-23
Jordan's stats: 29.3 PPG 5.8 RPG 8.5 APG 2.8 SPG 1.0 BPG 43.6% FG 82.8% FT

1986 Boston Celtics 67-15 NBA Champs
Jordan's stats: 43.7 PPG 6.3 RPG 5.7 APG 2.3 SPG 1.3 BPG 50.5% FG 87.2% FT

1987 Boston Celtics 59-23 NBA runner up
Jordan's stats: 35.7 PPG 7.0 RPG 6.0 APG 2.0 SPG 2.3 BPG 41.7% FG 89.7% FT

1988 Detroit Pistons 54-28 NBA runner up
Jordan's stats: 27.4 PPG 8.8 RPG 4.6 APG 2.0 SPG 0.6 BPG 49.1% FG 78.9% FT

1989 Detroit Pistons 63-19 NBA Champs
Jordan's stats: 29.7 PPG 5.5 RPG 6.5 APG 2.0 SPG 0.5 BPG 46.0% FG 75.9% FT

1990 Detroit Pistons 59-23 NBA Champs
Jordan's stats: 32.1 PPG 7.1 RPG 6.3 APG 2.1 SPG 0.6 BPG 46.7% FG 87.5% FT

1995 Orlando Magic 57-25 
Jordan's stats: 31.0 PPG 6.5 RPG 3.7 APG 2.5 SPG 1.8 BPG 47.7% FG 79.6% FT

So, there are the losses. He never averaged less than 27.4 PPG in a playoff loss. No team he lost to ever won less than 54 games. The only team he ever lost to who did not go on to play in the NBA Finals were the Milwaukee Bucks his rookie year. 

I don't see a series where he averaged 17.8 PPG in a loss, do you? Do you see the series where he shot 60.0% FT? 

*How about 22.0 PPG on 35.6 FREAKING PERCENT in a sweep? Do you see any series up there where the opponent swept Jordan and held him to 22.0 PPG on a terribly indictable 35.6% FG like the Spurs did to Lebron in 2007? *


----------



## Hoodey (Jul 3, 2011)

Nimreitz, homey, I'm still waiting on all of those series where MJ lost and averaged 17.8 PPG with definitely one, maybe two future hall of famers ON HIS TEAM or where he shot 60% FT and lost or shot 35.6% and lost. Please, tell me about them.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Hoodey said:


> You don't know what you're talking about.
> 
> Here were Lebron's statistics against the 2011 Mavericks, who had one hall of famer in anything close to his prime.
> 
> ...





> You're trumpeting numbers in a loss.
> 
> You can get big numbers and lose by not getting others involved.


-hoodey page 8 this thread.


----------

