Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

[AIRJ23]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

Facts. That, and projection. I never got defensive, never called or insinuated someone was an idiot, etc. All him. Some people can't handle others simply having a difference of opinion. And what makes it so weird is that I even gave an argument for the Warriors winning lol.

I know I didn't say that about Mullin and Klay, nor did I give any indication that that was my opinion. That was way out of left field.

tru11 is right--just ignore him. We were all enjoying the conversation and we can keep it going if you take tru11's advice. Just ignore him.

I think he was talking about me comparing the 98 Pacers #3 to the 2016 Warriors #3 and decided to assume I was talking about the 2017 Warriors #3. But who knows with him. Lol.

On that subject, I think it’s worth pointing out how people discuss teams based on “who has more star talent” too much. Using the 98 pacers as a down point for the 98 Bulls going to 7 games is what’s actually “stupid.” Because you have to judge a team by the tools they have and how those tools can exploit another team’s weaknesses. Also rules of the era. The Pacers were immensely more physical.

That same logic can completely blow up the “KD warriors are unbeatable” narrative since the rockets took them to 7.

And those Pacers a couple years later, a couple years older and more injured almost took the SHAQ/KOBE lakers to 7.

I dunno who plays ball here, but if you do, is it usually the team with more talented offensive players that beats you, or teams with the best tools that know how to utilize each tool to attack your weaknesses?

Let’s look at each tool individually:

Playmaking: PACERS (Mark Jackson is one of the best playmakers to play and superior to Dray or Steph in that respect)

Height: PACERS (Warriors tallest player was 6’11. Rik Smits was 7’4, could shoot, stretch and run the floor. I’d love to see him in this era where he’d be allowed to really stretch and pop threes).

If we’re talking strength and physicality, I Dale and Antonio Davis your little Draymond Green.

Depth: JALEN ROSE was the 5th or 6th OR 7th best player on those Pacers. That’s depth.

Coaching: Bird vs Kerr. I’ll call that a tossup.

The 2016 warriors have the best 1-2 shooting punch ever (the 2017 warriors the best 1-2-3) in Steph and Klay. But if I had to find any other 1-2 punch to challenge them in a shootout. It would be Reggie and Mullin.

So trying to discount the Bulls based on the 98 Pacers (and the 96 Bulls are a far cry better than the 98 Bulls) shows you lack basketball knowledge and probably have never played. Those pacers had every tool imaginable and were extremely well coached and fluid. They took two of the best teams EVER to 6 or 7 games. Don’t be so quick to assume those 98 Pacers wouldn’t give the 17 Warriors fits either. After all, the Rockets did.

[Real2KInsider]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

When someone is wrong, they usually refer to the “you’re an idiot” retort.

When someone states demonstrable falsehoods as fact, they get called an idiot. It's not an opinion that the sky is blue.

Who said he was better than prime Klay? I said the third best player on the 98 Pacers was arguably better than the third best player on the 16 Warriors.

Sorry, but if you're not an idiot, you're a liar.

What you actually said:

Mullin actually may be the fourth best player on those 98 Pacers. Which means I’d put their fourth best player ahead of the 2016 Warriors third best player.

Your character gets questioned because you routinely argue in bad faith.

The third best player on the Pacers was actually Rik Smits or Mark Jackson. I’d choose either of them on my team over Draymond Green.

2016 Draymond Green: All-NBA 2nd Team, All-Defense First Team, 2nd in DPOY voting

You would take a couple of old, flawed, 1x All-Stars... over a future HOF (at the peak of his powers) who revolutionized his position for an entire generation. Ok.

You're entitled to as many ****ty opinions as you want. You can misrepresent an era of basketball all you want. You can argue in bad faith all you want. Just don't cry when you get called on your BS.

[JAY_D1]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

So, whens Game 5 bulls96? Looking forward to more of the Game recaps

[AIRJ23]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

When someone states demonstrable falsehoods as fact, they get called an idiot. It's not an opinion that the sky is blue.



Sorry, but if you're not an idiot, you're a liar.

CORRECTION: What you actually said -



Your character gets questioned because you routinely argue in bad faith.



2016 Draymond Green: All-NBA 2nd Team, All-Defense First Team, 2nd in DPOY voting

You're entitled to as many ****ty opinions as you want. You can misrepresent an era of basketball all you want. You can argue in bad faith all you want. Just don't cry when you get called on your BS.

So then you admit you got it wrong when you insinuated I compared Klay to Mullin.

And what I originally said was the third best player of each team goes in favor of the Pacers. Smits > Dray all day. I don’t care what Dray’s defensive credentials are when they’re within an era of much less defensive specialist competition. He didn’t beat Hakeem, Dikembe, Payton, Admiral, Pippen, Jordan, Rodman, Stockton (all time steals leader) for DPOY. Those are all guys who played in the same era! That’s insane to imagine now. You had to beat them for DPOY. We’re not talking Hassan Whiteside and Paul Millsap here, lol. Draymond is not winning DPOY in the 90’s and not even close. If you think he is, you’re way too lost in recency bias to be having this debate. Firstly back then Dray couldn’t play power forward. He’s way too short. So they’d have him at what, SF? He’d be mitigated.

I’d love to see even a 34 year old Mullin in today’s era. In 98 he hit 94% of free throws, 44% 3’s. Imagine that guy spotting up in the corner for 10 kick out 3’s a night. Oh, and he played all 82 games!! Something nobody can do today.

So no, picking old Mullin over young Dray isn’t as far fetched as you’d like to think.

[jd@os]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

So, whens Game 5 bulls96? Looking forward to more of the Game recaps

Agreed! The name-calling against other posters is not needed and waaaay out of bounds. Back to the regularly scheduled thread. Again, tru11 said it best.

[Real2KInsider]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

So then you admit you got it wrong when you insinuated I compared Klay to Mullin.

....Is English your 3rd language or something?

I don’t care what Dray’s defensive credentials are when they’re within an era of much less defensive specialist competition. He didn’t beat Hakeem, Dikembe, Payton, Admiral, Pippen, Jordan, Rodman, Stockton (all time steals leader) for DPOY. Those are all guys who played in the same era! That’s insane to imagine now. You had to beat them for DPOY. We’re not talking Hassan Whiteside and Paul Millsap here, lol.

You don't care what Dray's defensive credentials are because you're moving the goal posts once again (heaven forbid you be wrong for once in your life).
Did the Admiral, Rodman, or Stockton play for the PACERS??? NOPE. The Pacers didn't have ANYONE remotely close to Draymond's impact on that end.

Which is kinda relevant when you're trying to argue two starting-caliber players were better / more impactful to their teams than a player who was literally All-NBA SECOND TEAM (Other 1st/2nd Team Forwards - LeBron, Kawhi, Durant).

I know the urge to state a bunch of big names is strong, but do try to stick to your own argument. Explain what Pacers had remotely close to his two-way impact, DPOY-caliber or otherwise. Because it sure as **** wasn't Smits or Mark ****ing Jackson.

Smits was a 15-18 point scorer and garbage defender/rebounder, which is why Dale Davis / Antonio Davis had to guard every center the Pacers matched up with (Which you'd know if you actually watched the NBA or these Pacers back then, rather than just making **** up on the fly). He's literally Brook Lopez without the defense or 3pt range. Jonas Valanciunas minus the rebounding. An old-school Boban Marjanovic.

Jackson meanwhile shares literally all of your Draymond criticisms - while being a non-factor defensively (at best).

Draymond is not winning DPOY in the 90’s and not even close. If you think he is, you’re way too lost in recency bias to be having this debate.

Only in sports do people think evolution works backwards.

Firstly back then Dray couldn’t play power forward. He’s way too short.

....Didn't you just reference Dennis Rodman.... not to mention Charles Barkley, Larry Johnson, and Anthony Mason were All-Stars in this era...... But don't let facts and logic stop your precious feelings.

I’d love to see even a 34 year old Mullin in today’s era. In 98 he hit 94% of free throws, 44% 3’s. Imagine that guy spotting up in the corner for 10 kick out 3’s a night.

Imagine not knowing who Kyle Korver was.

[AIRJ23]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

....Is English your 3rd language or something?



You don't care what Dray's defensive credentials are because you're moving the goal posts once again (heaven forbid you be wrong for once in your life).
Did the Admiral, Rodman, or Stockton play for the PACERS??? NOPE. The Pacers didn't have ANYONE remotely close to Draymond's impact on that end.

Which is kinda relevant when you're trying to argue two starting-caliber players were better / more impactful to their teams than a player who was literally All-NBA SECOND TEAM (Other 1st/2nd Team Forwards - LeBron, Kawhi, Durant).

I know the urge to state a bunch of big names is strong, but do try to stick to your own argument. Explain what Pacers had remotely close to his two-way impact, DPOY-caliber or otherwise. Because it sure as **** wasn't Smits or Mark ****ing Jackson.

Smits was a 15-18 point scorer and garbage defender/rebounder, which is why Dale Davis / Antonio Davis had to guard every center the Pacers matched up with (Which you'd know if you actually watched the NBA or these Pacers back then, rather than just making **** up on the fly). He's literally Brook Lopez without the defense or 3pt range. Jonas Valanciunas minus the rebounding. An old-school Boban Marjanovic.

Jackson meanwhile shares literally all of your Draymond criticisms - while being a non-factor defensively (at best).



Only in sports do people think evolution works backwards.



....Didn't you just reference Dennis Rodman.... not to mention Charles Barkley, Larry Johnson, and Anthony Mason were All-Stars in this era...... But don't let facts and logic stop your precious feelings.



Imagine not knowing who Kyle Korver was.

Lmao. “Evolution” isn’t a thing when discussing the nba because drastic rule changes were made to make the league look as it does today. It didn’t just happen organically. And yeah players now getting injured in layup lines or doing the most basic things like stepping backwards and being unable to play 82 games is so much “evolution” over guys back then playing a more physical game in less luxurious conditions yet still suiting up for 82. They had to make a rule to not sit games out now lol. Dominque Wilkins came back from a torn achilles the very next season and averaged 30. So much evolution.

And if you think draymond is a better defender than Worm, Pip, Glove, Hakeem etc. then clearly you’re projecting when you say I didn’t watch back then. Winning DPOY in 2017 when Robert Covington is #4 in voting is on another planet from how we judged defenders in the 90’s.

Saying Smits is Boban also shows a sore lack of knowledge. Smits averaged 18 in an era where scoring was 7ppg less than it was in 2016. Draymond’s defensive advantage over Smits is outweighed by Smits height and offensive advantage. If Dray was even remotely as much a non-offensive liability as you state, then why at only 32 years old does he look like the worst offensive player we’ve seen in ages. Or did you not watch the lakers vs warriors series where the man looked like he never touched a basketball when he had said ball. Blowing wide open layups etc. The way Draymond looks now, he’d be lucky to get any minutes on the 98 Pacers.

Like I said. Mark Jackson is a better playmaker than ANYONE on the 2016 warriors. Smits is taller and a better big man than ANYONE on the 2016 Warriors. The Davis boys were stronger than anyone on the 2016 warriors. They were extremely well coached. Jalen Rose was the 5-7th best player on the team! That’s more depth than the 2016 Warriors.

Reggie and Mullin are the two closest guys who can shoot toe to toe with Steph and Klay.

Saying the 98 Pacers would give the 2016 Warriors a run isn’t as far fetched as a recency bias would like to believe. And remember, the Pacers did this before the 2004 rule changes. Imagine Reggie and Mullin with today’s spacing. They’d absolutely cook. And older battered version of those Pacers gave a much tougher Shaq/Kobe lakers a run.

Lastly, there’s so much “evolution” now, the best players are going to a 60 year old Hakeem to teach them how to be better players. Make it make sense.

There are currently two videos of old men from those pacers in a head to head shootout with members of the 2017 warriors. The pacers players are 2-0. That is a fact.

<iframe frameborder="0" scrolling="no" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0"width="788.54" height="443" type="text/html" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7Dg7bLL5Kgo?autoplay=0&fs=0&iv_load_policy=3&showi nfo=0&rel=0&cc_load_policy=0&start=0&end=0&origin= https://youtubeembedcode.com"><div><small><a href="https://youtubeembedcode.com/en">youtubeembedcode en</a></small></div><div><small><a href="https://mikrolån.com/">snabblån utan uc</a></small></div></iframe>

<iframe frameborder="0" scrolling="no" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0"width="788.54" height="443" type="text/html" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/AyiYuBCLTjc?autoplay=0&fs=0&iv_load_policy=3&showi nfo=0&rel=0&cc_load_policy=0&start=0&end=0&origin= https://youtubeembedcode.com"><div><small><a href="https://youtubeembedcode.com/nl/">youtubeembedcode.com/nl/</a></small></div><div><small><a href="https://starburstnotongamstop.org/">how to get around gamstop</a></small></div></iframe>

[jd@os]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

^Well I guess it might be challenging to ignore someone when you can cook like that. Dang AIRJ23 lol.

I like how you not only proved that you have looked at games but did so without the name calling and personal attacks. This ain't Reddit--it's Operation Sports. People can disagree with your assessment of games, but to say you don't look at games is an outright and shameful flat-out lie.

[JAY_D1]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

Excited to hear what Game 5 is going to be like in bulls96 matchup.

Jordan could go for 50 or could he have a stinker? Will Pip go crazy?

[AIRJ23]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

^Well I guess it might be challenging to ignore someone when you can cook like that. Dang AIRJ23 lol.

I like how you not only proved that you have looked at games but did so without the name calling and personal attacks. This ain't Reddit--it's Operation Sports. People can disagree with your assessment of games, but to say you don't look at games is an outright and shameful flat-out lie.

Thanks, and truth.

And the irony of him calling Smits “Brook Lopez with less range” when Lopez was an all star in the last decade. Lol. Also Lopez is 7’1. Smits was a staggering 7’4. Brook Lopez didn’t shoot ANY threes until his 8th season. I love how these guys assume every modern player has some 3 point fairy dust. No. What really happened is rule changes were intended to force the game into a more spaced out offensive friendly scoring fest with more open looks for more high percentage shots. NBA literally admits this. If Rick Smits played today, he, like Lopez would start shooting 6 threes a game, because he’d be encouraged to. And he’d be able to hit them at a solid clip. Because he was a good shooter. And he’s 7’4. Smits today would he an absolute force. Smits played through some of the lowest scoring years and HE NEVER AVERAGED LESS THAN DOUBLE DIGITS!

Compare that to Draymond who looks like my great grandpa on the offensive side, averaging single digits in the highest scoring era.

As for Mullin. Not only did he at 55 years old cook prime KD in a head to head shootout. But at 34 years old he shot 94% FT. THAT’S MORE THAN STEPH OR KLAY ever did.

In 1999 at 35 years old, Mullin shot .465 3 pointers on 3 attempts a game (pretty high for back them). That was the dead ball era. Physical, slow, hand checking, etc. HE SHOT A HIGHER PERCENTAGE THAN STEPH OR KLAY EVER DID.

Any hooper will tell you Chris Mullin is one of the best shooters to ever touch a basketball, bar none. Put 34 year old Mullin in today’s era and let him spot up for 12 threes a game and he’ll hit nearly half of them. Oh, and Reggie would be able to do the same. Those 98 pacers would be very well suited for today’s era. Mix playmaker wizard Jackson diming to them, 7’4 Smits shooting threes as well. Dangerously suited for the modern era.

[jd@os]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

Excited to hear what Game 5 is going to be like in bulls96 matchup.

Jordan could go for 50 or could he have a stinker? Will Pip go crazy?

Great post AIRJ23. Keeping it classy my guy. Not getting “defensive”, not name calling.

JAY: I’m looking forward to hearing it, too, but as I said before, KD is the ultimate wild card. Will he detonate and get and stay hot, or will he be thrown off by Pippen and Rodman? KD might very well decide the series.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Real2KInsider]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

Lmao. “Evolution” isn’t a thing when discussing the nba because drastic rule changes were made to make the league look as it does today. It didn’t just happen organically.

Turning basketball into a skills competition rather than a physical battle was organic. The league had to save itself financially because nobody was paying $ to watch the Spurs, Pistons, and Pacers win playoff games 72-70. The pendulum swung too far and they needed to course correct.

You make the mistake of thinking modern players wouldn't adapt their games under different settings. You speak of nonsense like how older players would look with today's freedom while entirely discounting the ability of other players to play a more physical style. You really think Draymond is going to look worse in the 90s? LOL, of course you do, because you think LeBron wouldn't be utterly dominating a league made of 6'3 white shooting guards and a league so "physical" that a 5'3" player was a starting PG.

And yeah players now getting injured in layup lines or doing the most basic things like stepping backwards and being unable to play 82 games is so much “evolution” over guys back then playing a more physical game in less luxurious conditions yet still suiting up for 82.

It's a lot easier to stay healthy when players are walking the ball down the court every possession. NBA players today move a greater distance than ever on both ends, which is both tangibly measured and also just obvious to anyone with a set of eyeballs.

Dominque Wilkins came back from a torn achilles the very next season and averaged 30. So much evolution.

Kevin Durant.

And if you think draymond is a better defender than Worm, Pip, Glove, Hakeem etc.

Draymond literally would have been Pippen in the 90s. A high IQ point-forward with a questionable shot, guarding other PGs when called upon (as Pippen did to Mark Jackson in the very Pacers series).

Note once again that you are completely ill-equipped to talk about the Pacers which is why you continually refer to big names on other teams as any type of evidence.

Your argument is that you'd take two players who weren't top 20 in the NBA at ANY point of their careers, over a player who very clearly was.

Saying Smits is Boban also shows a sore lack of knowledge.

It does. On your end. For not knowing Boban's skill set, and having any concept of how it would translate.

Smits averaged 18 in an era where scoring was 7ppg less than it was in 2016.

Smits also played 30 MPG in a season only twice. He averaged 3.5 Fouls for his career. 4.7 per 36 minutes. This is with reduced possessions LOL. And like many centers of his day, he had very little offensive value unless you were force feeding him.

Draymond’s defensive advantage over Smits is outweighed by Smits height and offensive advantage.

I know I'm talking to someone incapable of articulating how defensive schemes have changed in the last 25 years, but they even don't play the same position. Green, like Pippen, Rodman, and other DPOY-caliber wing defenders, has the versatility to defend multiple positions. He is INFINITELY more valuable to a team concept. I know you 90s heads love your one-on-one battles but do try to use your imagination.

If Dray was even remotely as much a non-offensive liability as you state, then why at only 32 years old does he look like the worst offensive player we’ve seen in ages.

If you think a Power Forward averaging 7 assists (13th in the NBA, 3rd among non-guards behind Jokic/Sabonis) is an offensive liability, might I refer you to Mark ****ing Jackson's offensive game.

(The 2023 Warriors were 8th Offensively. They ranked 1st Offensively in 2016, 2017, and 2019. Pretty good considering Green is such a liability LMFAO)

The way Draymond looks now, he’d be lucky to get any minutes on the 98 Pacers.

Funny how you're discussing Draymond NOW in 2023, rather than IN HIS PRIME at 2016. Always moving the goal posts and arguing in bad faith. You are truly pathetic.

You can't even name the backups on this team without heading to Basketball-Reference. Nor could you articulate any of their games if you did.

Like I said. Mark Jackson is a better playmaker than ANYONE on the 2016 warriors. Smits is taller and a better big man than ANYONE on the 2016 Warriors. The Davis boys were stronger than anyone on the 2016 warriors. They were extremely well coached. Jalen Rose was the 5-7th best player on the team! That’s more depth than the 2016 Warriors.

And yet, the 2016 Warriors won 73 games. They went to 5 consecutive NBA Finals, winning 3. They're one of the biggest dynasties in NBA history.

Shoot, why not take Rik Smits > Kevin McHale while we're at it?

That same Pacers team missed the playoffs entirely the year before, and lost to an 8th seed the year after (Latrell Sprewell & Allan Houston ain't exactly Jordan/Pippen or Steph/Klay lol)

Saying the 98 Pacers would give the 2016 Warriors a run isn’t as far fetched as a recency bias would like to believe.

I honestly don't even think you know what the term "recency bias" means. You're afflicted by it's opposite, PRIMACY BIAS. You have an idealized notion of the past and crippling nostalgia. You regularly throw modern players under the bus. You don't love basketball. You love a specific subset of league history because you're a giant Jordan homer.

It's okay to have your opinions and preferences. You can like older basketball relative to current to your hearts content. But when you make foolish statements like Rik Smits and Mark Jackson were more valuable to their teams than All-NBA players were to an all-time great team, you're going to get torched and have your overall intelligence rightly questioned.

^Well I guess it might be challenging to ignore someone when you can cook like that. Dang AIRJ23 lol.

I like how you not only proved that you have looked at games but did so without the name calling and personal attacks. This ain't Reddit--it's Operation Sports. People can disagree with your assessment of games, but to say you don't look at games is an outright and shameful flat-out lie.

Hey look, it's the peanut gallery. Do you have any input on the 98 Pacers? Can you help your brother out? I didn't realize practice videos of retired players was "looking at games". I'll keep that in mind the next time I see Ben Simmons and Rajon Rondo shooting drills. Do try to stick to the truth and keep your feelings out of it. "Cooking" indeed.

[jd@os]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

Right! I just have a nostalgia bias! I glorify Michael Jordan so much that I imagined him locking Penny Hardaway up in a full court press for an entire half! These Jordan fans are crazy! They think he can lock up one of the most skilled PG prospects from even crossing half court lol.

….Orrrrr I recently watched game 4 of the 96 ECF on YouTube and saw for myself the masterclass put on.

It’s amazing what you can learn from actually watching and analyzing games across eras with an open mind....

That's your problem--you're watching games and not looking at them. Nice try AIRJ23, but watching games and looking at them are not the same thing. I thought I knew you smh.

Idk what it was about that Game 4. I watched it and looked at it (you only watched it which doesn't count), and it seems as if the Bulls' defense eventually took any fight away from the Magic. Defense can do that to you, and the '17 Warriors offense firing on all cylinders can do it, too--whose will is going to break first? That's the beauty of this match-up.

[AIRJ23]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

Turning basketball into a skills competition rather than a physical battle was organic. The league had to save itself financially because nobody was paying $ to watch the Spurs, Pistons, and Pacers win playoff games 72-70. The pendulum swung too far and they needed to course correct.

You make the mistake of thinking modern players wouldn't adapt their games under different settings. You speak of nonsense like how older players would look with today's freedom while entirely discounting the ability of other players to play a more physical style. You really think Draymond is going to look worse in the 90s? LOL, of course you do, because you think LeBron wouldn't be utterly dominating a league made of 6'3 white shooting guards and a league so "physical" that a 5'3" player was a starting PG.




It's a lot easier to stay healthy when players are walking the ball down the court every possession. NBA players today move a greater distance than ever on both ends, which is both tangibly measured and also just obvious to anyone with a set of eyeballs.



Kevin Durant.



Draymond literally would have been Pippen in the 90s. A high IQ point-forward with a questionable shot, guarding other PGs when called upon (as Pippen did to Mark Jackson in the very Pacers series).

Note once again that you are completely ill-equipped to talk about the Pacers which is why you continually refer to big names on other teams as any type of evidence.

Your argument is that you'd take two players who weren't top 20 in the NBA at ANY point of their careers, over a player who very clearly was.




It does. On your end. For not knowing Boban's skill set, and having any concept of how it would translate.



Smits also played 30 MPG in a season only twice. He averaged 3.5 Fouls for his career. 4.7 per 36 minutes. This is with reduced possessions LOL. And like many centers of his day, he had very little offensive value unless you were force feeding him.



I know I'm talking to someone incapable of articulating how defensive schemes have changed in the last 25 years, but they even don't play the same position. Green, like Pippen, Rodman, and other DPOY-caliber wing defenders, has the versatility to defend multiple positions. He is INFINITELY more valuable to a team concept. I know you 90s heads love your one-on-one battles but do try to use your imagination.



If you think a Power Forward averaging 7 assists (13th in the NBA, 3rd among non-guards behind Jokic/Sabonis) is an offensive liability, might I refer you to Mark ****ing Jackson's offensive game.

(The 2023 Warriors were 8th Offensively. They ranked 1st Offensively in 2016, 2017, and 2019. Pretty good considering Green is such a liability LMFAO)



Funny how you're discussing Draymond NOW in 2023, rather than IN HIS PRIME at 2016. Always moving the goal posts and arguing in bad faith. You are truly pathetic.

You can't even name the backups on this team without heading to Basketball-Reference. Nor could you articulate any of their games if you did.



And yet, the 2016 Warriors won 73 games. They went to 5 consecutive NBA Finals, winning 3. They're one of the biggest dynasties in NBA history.

Shoot, why not take Rik Smits > Kevin McHale while we're at it?

That same Pacers team missed the playoffs entirely the year before, and lost to an 8th seed the year after (Latrell Sprewell & Allan Houston ain't exactly Jordan/Pippen or Steph/Klay lol)



I honestly don't even think you know what the term "recency bias" means. You're afflicted by it's opposite, PRIMACY BIAS. You have an idealized notion of the past and crippling nostalgia. You regularly throw modern players under the bus. You don't love basketball. You love a specific subset of league history because you're a giant Jordan homer.

It's okay to have your opinions and preferences. You can like older basketball relative to current to your hearts content. But when you make foolish statements like Rik Smits and Mark Jackson were more valuable to their teams than All-NBA players were to an all-time great team, you're going to get torched and have your overall intelligence rightly questioned.



Hey look, it's the peanut gallery. Do you have any input on the 98 Pacers? Can you help your brother out? I didn't realize practice videos of retired players was "looking at games". I'll keep that in mind the next time I see Ben Simmons and Rajon Rondo shooting drills. Do try to stick to the truth and keep your feelings out of it. "Cooking" indeed.

DID YOU SAY DRAYMOND WOULD BE PIPPEN IN THE 90’S???? LMAOOOOOOOOOOO

Now I know you never watched games ����

Pippen at 32 years old actually could play offense. Draymond green at 32 years old looks like a deer in the headlights when he has the ball and blows open layups. Pippen also was an immensely better defender and didn’t need to get techs to make his impact felt. You really don’t know basketball.

Boban is tall. Smits is tall. That’s about it. Smits in today’s game would be a 7’4 stretch who could kill from the mid range and extend his game to the 3 point line. Bobon couldn’t make it in an era where centers are 6’9. Smits went head to head against Shaq, Admiral, Hakeem, Ewing, etc. These are not the same.

Riiiight so players are “doing more” to get injured more. Lmao. Classic recency bias retort. Let me ask, was Kd and Lemelo Ball “doing more” when they got injured? Kd got injured in a layup line. Lamelo got injured literally stepping backwards.

I know you don’t watch when you say players get injured doing more complex things when injuries usually happen with them doing the most basic moves and walking. Spend less time in the stat sheets and more watching actual games. But “evolution” right. So much evolution players need to be fined to actually show up.

Like I said. The members of those pacers are 2-0 against members of the warriors in shooting contests. That’s facts. Not feelings.

As for your “games became unwatchable” comment. That’s irrelevant. Fact is modern players COULDN’T play in that style of game well enough, hence the drastic rule changes to FORCE scoring higher. If they could play that type of game, they would have beaten said defenses organically. Instead the nba institutes rule after rule to make scoring easier than ever. That’s not evolution.

People who are getting cooked are always telling the ones they’re getting cooked by, that’s they’re “getting cooked.”

My guy. The reality is I’m cooking you like 55 year old Mark Jackson and 55 year old Mullin cooked Steph and KD in games of HORSE.

<iframe frameborder="0" scrolling="no" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0"width="788.54" height="443" type="text/html" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6IPXSqOhykg?autoplay=0&fs=0&iv_load_policy=3&showi nfo=0&rel=0&cc_load_policy=0&start=0&end=0&origin= https://youtubeembedcode.com"><div><small><a href="https://youtubeembedcode.com/de/">youtubeembedcode.com/de/</a></small></div><div><small><a href="https://casino-without-swedish-license.se/">best casino without swedish license</a></small></div></iframe>

[bulls96]

Re: Its the NBA FINALS: '96 Bulls vs '17 Warriors - Who will win a 7-game series?

CHICAGO -- With a 3-1 advantage and playing at home, Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls try to closeout their erstwhile GOAT rivals Durant's Golden State Warriors in Game 5 of this outstanding Finals series.

Can Durant and company respond to fight another day?

Watch the game here: https://youtu.be/a56tqKvv4BU

Bulls had a hot start as Jordan looked like he was on a mission to finish this series. THey led 12-5 halfway forcing an early timeout by Coach Kerr. The Warriors showed their firepower by responding quickly, led by Steph Curry who would heat up scoring 8 in an 18-9 run by the Warriors to close the quarter, helping GS lead by 2 going into the 2nd. 23-21


Durant started the 2nd with two quick buckets, while Klay scored on consecutive 3's early. THe Bulls got stagnant and GS completed a 16-6 run that was punctuated by a monster alley-oop slam form Klay to Mcgee right over Pippen. THe Warriors go up by double digits, forcing time a timeout. Jordan tried his best to ignite the Bulls offense, but he himself is shooting poorly, only 4/10, but managed to score Chicago's last 6 pts to help cut the deficit to 6 going into the half, 47-41.



The cold spell conitnued for the Bulls in the 3rd quarter as the Warriors opened up with a 9-2 run to go up by double digits once again. Neither Jordan nor Pippen could get anything going. TO this point, they were a combined 14/33 from the field. The Warriors were starting to miss some makeable threes too in this period and the game did not go copmletely away from the Bulls. Still, the Warriors led by as much as 14 72-58. A late spurt from the Bulls 10-3 run including a 3 from Kerr as shotclock expired helped narrow that leda down to 7, 75-68 heading into the 4th.

With the lead down to single digits, the stage was set for a possible Jordan comeback to win Game 5 and earn the Bulls the title of the GOAT team.

Jordan had rested most of the latter half of the 3rd to help him play the whole 4th period. ANd it appeared to have worked as Jordan was energized to start the 4th. He scored 16 points in the 4th quarter to try and will this game again to victory.

But the Warriors had Kevin Durant.

In a literal scoring duel with Jordan in the 4th quarter, KD played his biggest and most crucial quarter yet in this entire series. KD responded for the Warriors with 17 pts to counter Jordan's 16 in the 4th to help stem the MJ assault.

Still, the Warriors were holding on to a 4 pt lead after the Bulls cut it down to as little as 3 with little over 2 minutes remianing, when the biggest shot of the game was made by..

Draymond Green. Bulls had played great defense in this crucial possession, and blocked a follow up shot by McGee who would still get it back and swing the ball to an open Draymond at the top of the key. He would make the open 3 and that gave the Warriors a 7 pt lead, This proved to be enough cushion as the Bulls would miss an open 3 and commit costly turnovers down the stretch. 2 late 3's from Kukoc would have the Bulls cut it to as little as 5 with 40 secs to go but Kevin Durant would put the final nail in the coffin with a 3-pointer to bring it up to 10 with 16 secs to go.

KD delivers in Game 5 to bring the series back to GS for Game 6.

Jordan had 42 pts 6 rebs 5 assts. Pippen added 21, 7 and 7 but struggled from the field.

Durant led the Warriors with 31 pts 9 rebs 4 assts. Klay had 17. Steph had another poor shooting night, scoring 16 on 3/15 shooting. It was made up by Dray and McGee who both had double figures.