And the best team of all time is....

[Yeah...THAT Guy]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Regarding this post, if anyone is interested, the 96 Bulls vs. Magic is on NBA TV right now. So nice to see Michael Jordan play again.

Wow, Shaq just got switched onto Scottie Pippen and Pippen iso'd and Shaq just ripped him and took it the length of the court for the slam. Sorry this is so off-topic, but I couldn't help it lol

[bamalam]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Players of the 60s were slow and unathletic? Relatively speaking yes, but there were teams that proved to be the exception. Chamberlain was in his prime in 67 and was fast side to side and up and down. Lucious Jackson was extremely forceful. Greer had power and quickness. Cunningham could jump to the moon. Of course, their fundamentals were superb. These guys could absolutely compete. Russell would have had little difficulty against Howard's crude offense, Shaq would score his points on Russ however.

The Bulls are going to use 20+ fouls against Wilt? If thats the case then Longley would foul out and that would mean Wennington would have to guard him (that would be a disaster). How would Wilt score? A fadeaway from the left box, a finger roll, or on offensive rebounds which there would be plenty of. Greer's offense would be contained by Jordan but you could never underestimate his courage in the endgame. Most likely the Sixers would be calling Cunningham's number with the game on line. Since Kukoc was a poor defender, I like Billy's chances.

Chet Walker was a phenomenal player. He liked to score on the baseline and he was murderous in how he created room for his shots. Whoever guarded him (Pippen I assume) would need a cold tub. For what its worth, Walker was in his prime as well. And hey, if guys like Dan Issel and George Gervin are in the Hall of Fame, why not Walker?
Those weight listings are notoriously inaccurate. Wilt had an effective playing weight of 300 lbs (at least).

How would Cunningham defend Kukoc? He couldn't. Toni was 6'10, could handle like a guard, and could create his own shot. The question is, would Kukoc outscore Cunningham? Probably not, especially since MJ got the first crack at the clutch shots while Cunningham was the go to guy for his squad.

Rodman never faced a frontline like Chamberlain and Jackson. These two were so powerful and relentless. Rodman was a warrior so he would battle hard but he would ultimately be worn down and outnumbered.

Yeah, the Bulls' precision and skill would have to carry the day if they were to win this series. They would have no chance if they wanted to play a physical game with the Sixers. Salley and Edwards? They were washed up and hardly ever used. I did see this Sixers team and I say it would have been a riveting contest, seven games in fact.

never saw that sixers squad, but if you think rodman would get worn down, you are mistaken. dude was bionic according to coach daley in detroit. had a non stop motor. no energy decline thru those bulls years

plus played the best defense ive ever seen vs 300 lb shaq , and have no doubt he would be switched to wilt at crunch time and more than hold his own.

plus he would get in guys' heads mentally. one of the best basketball players of all time. very underrated.


bulls team defense with harper,jordan,pippen and rodman=pitbulls. no contest vs any team from the 60s, imo.

+mj would get wilt in foul trouble at the rim

+mj = 6-0 in the finals

[AlexBrady]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

86-87 Lakers were the best team I have ever seen.

The 87 Lakers were probably the best running team of all time. Magic was unstoppable in the open court and they were always looking for early offense with Worthy and Scott. If nothing materialized then they would just dump it into Jabbar who was still deadly.
One of their problems though was that they had too many poor defenders. Only Cooper, Green, and Rambis could defend. The great teams could control the boards and slow down their break. Thats why I ranked them at ten.

never saw that sixers squad, but if you think rodman would get worn down, you are mistaken. dude was bionic according to coach daley in detroit. had a non stop motor. no energy decline thru those bulls years

plus played the best defense ive ever seen vs 300 lb shaq , and have no doubt he would be switched to wilt at crunch time and more than hold his own.

plus he would get in guys' heads mentally. one of the best basketball players of all time. very underrated.


bulls team defense with harper,jordan,pippen and rodman=pitbulls. no contest vs any team from the 60s, imo.

+mj would get wilt in foul trouble at the rim

+mj = 6-0 in the finals

The Sixers always wore down the opposing team's bigs. They just kept attacking the boards, punching, tipping available balls. Rodman had the heart and athleticism but didn't have the strength of Wilt or Jackson. Quite simply, it would be two versus one.

A confrontation between Wilt and Rodman would be interesting. Wilt would have the huge height and power advantage which would probably be too much for Worm to handle and would result in lots of fouls. If Rodman somehow got in Wilt's head then that would be a huge advantage for Chicago. There is still the issue of boxing out Jackson though. Who's going to do it?
On Rodman being underrated, I completely agree. Great, great player.

Yeah, the Bulls defense was airtight. They had that big backcourt with Harper and Jordan which meant they could play that quick switching defense. Pippen and Rodman were long and quick also. You have to finish defense with a rebound though and thats where they would have trouble against Philly. Jordan's drives might have gotten Wilt into foul trouble, however all of Wilt's fouls would have been vicious. It would be foolish to bet against MJ with all time bragging rights on the line.

[Jasong7777]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

You can't compare teams or players from different eras. Saying that the 95-96 Bulls team is the greatest team ever is nothing more than a guess.

[1Rose]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

If any of these other teams played against the '96 Bulls. I'm taking the Bulls 100% of the time.

You don't bet against Jordan...ever.

[Dice]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Russell would have had little difficulty against Howard's crude offense, Shaq would score his points on Russ however.

Russell would not be able to handle Howard's strength and he would just bully him in the post for two. If Wilt was able to do that to Russell, imagine what Howard would do. Who's probably twice as strong as Wilt. Shaq is about 3 times stronger than Wilt and he would have murdered Russell as well.

The Bulls are going to use 20+ fouls against Wilt? If thats the case then Longley would foul out and that would mean Wennington would have to guard him (that would be a disaster). How would Wilt score? A fadeaway from the left box, a finger roll, or on offensive rebounds which there would be plenty of. Greer's offense would be contained by Jordan but you could never underestimate his courage in the endgame. Most likely the Sixers would be calling Cunningham's number with the game on line. Since Kukoc was a poor defender, I like Billy's chances.

You still haven't explained how the Sixers will score in the clutch when Wilt will get fouled with his 42% FT. So you think Cunningham is going to carry the load? Not while Scottie Pippen is bottling him up.

Chet Walker was a phenomenal player. He liked to score on the baseline and he was murderous in how he created room for his shots. Whoever guarded him (Pippen I assume) would need a cold tub. For what its worth, Walker was in his prime as well. And hey, if guys like Dan Issel and George Gervin are in the Hall of Fame, why not Walker?

Chet Walker was probably the 60's version of Mark Aguirre. A guy who had a good career but just never did anything outstanding. That's why he's not in the Hall of Fame. You could probably make a case against Issel being in. BUT Issel did have one of the best ABA careers outside of Dr. J and George McGinnis. And even after the 77 merger, Issel still was averaging 20 ppg six times after that. Walker only averaged more than 20 ppg in a season only 3 times in his career. And as far as George Gervin, Gervin was one of the best scorers in NBA history. Yeah, he played no defense BUT let me repeat, he was one of the best scorers in NBA history. What statement can you say that Chet Walker was one of the greatest _________ in NBA history? I can't think of one. That's why he's not in the hall. And that's why one of the best defensive players in NBA history and best all-around forwards ever to play in Scottie Pippen is. 1996 was one of Pippen's best seasons. So yeah, he'd eat Chet Walker for lunch.


As I stated before, the 67 Sixers would get swept by any modern-era(post 1980) team on this list.

Against the 86 Celtics? With 4 hall of fame players? Two in their primes(Bird, McHale) and two still effective(Parish, DJ). If Chet gets eaten alive by Scottie Pippen, Bird is going to swallow him whole and spit him out offensively. Chet could attack him on the other end, but then McHale switches on Walker and his scoring stops. And nobody's stop McHale in the post. Luke Jackson nor Wilt. Wilt was a defensive presence but never a great one-on-one defender. Which McHale will make him since Wilt does have to worry about McHale in the post. Not even close against them. The 67 Sixers would get trounced against this team.

Against the 87 Lakers? Their line-up was just too big. Four guys in their starting line-up OVER 6'9"! The Sixers only had TWO guys on the entire roster 6'9" and taller. And these tall guys on the Lakers aren't your everyday stiffs. Magic(6'8") and Worthy(6'9") would run circles around the smaller Wally Jones(6'2") and Chet Walker(6'6"). And Wilt, as with McHale, would have to guard Kareem because he poses as a scoring threat. And Wilt would not be blocking the sky hook, so good luck with that.

I Can go on and on about the rest BUT the simple fact is that guys in the 60's didn't have the physical advantages that the modern day players do like weight training and dietary training. So I don't understand how you think a guy like Bill Russell would be able to hold his ground against Dwight Howard when Russell probably never picked up a barbell in his life AND Howard could probably bench press 250lbs easy?

[Moses Shuttlesworth]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Bill Russell's 11 championships speak for themselves. There has never been a team so dominant. Unless you were around to watch 60's basketball, there is no credence to an argument stating there were better teams in NBA history.

The NBA has changed, but everything is relative. I do think the 2001 Lakers would smoke a 60's Celtics team, but we cannot simply take away 8 consecutive championships like they aren't worth a damn thing. Until that feat is repeated, a team cannot be considered "better."

[Dice]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Bill Russell's 11 championships speak for themselves. There has never been a team so dominant. Unless you were around to watch 60's basketball, there is no credence to an argument stating there were better teams in NBA history.

The NBA has changed, but everything is relative. I do think the 2001 Lakers would smoke a 60's Celtics team, but we cannot simply take away 8 consecutive championships like they aren't worth a damn thing. Until that feat is repeated, a team cannot be considered "better."

And this is true. Not taking anything away from Russell or anybody from that era. BUT you have to put things into perspective when your comparing players across eras. Russell is one the greatest basketball players of all time. No doubt. However, Russell's greatness was because he was great in his generation. That's what cements him as a legend. Now as far as comparing him to a player like Dwight Howard, it's not even fair when your talking about accomplishments. Russell's accomplishments are in rarefied air space. The space where the Jordans, Magics and Birds reside in. BUT greater accomplishments doesn't equate to being a better player when your comparing players from different eras. If I was to put Howard in a time machine and go back to the 1960's, Howard would dominate Russell. It wouldn't be close. That's what I don't understand why someone would think that a team from the 60's would compete with any of the modern day great teams.

[23]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Take out the weights, supplements, trainers, computerized strategies, etc...

and what you have in Dwight Howard is this skinny frame not dominating anybody

[1Rose]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

This, the same goes with Wilt's inflated career averages. I mean the guy was the biggest and strongest on the court by a mile. Not taking away from his accomplishments but you always have to take the era into consideration.

The teams of the modern era, physically would dominate the teams from the 60's and 70s.

[Dice]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Take out the weights, supplements, trainers, computerized strategies, etc...

and what you have in Dwight Howard is this skinny frame not dominating anybody

However, you can't take those things away when your talking about the modern player. You can't just strip abilities away and say, he wouldn't be nothing without this and that. Size is part of basketball. A crucial part of basketball. And one of the key skills of basketball is how to use your size to your advantage.

People used to kill me with the "If Shaq wasn't 7'1" and 300+lbs he wouldn't be as good". So what's your point? Luc Longely was as big as Shaq but I've never seen Longely dominate a game like Shaq did. Size does matter. And using size to your advantage is a skill. Like jump shooting, dribbling, and passing.

[Dice]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

This, the same goes with Wilt's inflated career averages. I mean the guy was the biggest and strongest on the court by a mile. Not taking away from his accomplishments but you always have to take the era into consideration.

The teams of the modern era, physically would dominate the teams from the 60's and 70s.

And just to add, you make Wilt 6'1" instead of 7'1" in 1962 and I'd bet you he doesn't average 50 ppg.

[23]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

You can when you decided that you want to compare, because the players at Russells time were not awarded certain things players today use as advantages

Thats one reason why cross comparing is wrong. You have too many variables to consider.

[Dice]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

And I wholeheartedly agree. Comparing players from different eras is very difficult. That's why I stated that you cannot just take away the advantages that modern players have. So when I use the scenario of putting a player in a time machine, that's not going to take away his height, weight and skill that he brings to whatever era I want to put him in.

[AlexBrady]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Russell would not be able to handle Howard's strength and he would just bully him in the post for two. If Wilt was able to do that to Russell, imagine what Howard would do. Who's probably twice as strong as Wilt. Shaq is about 3 times stronger than Wilt and he would have murdered Russell as well.



You still haven't explained how the Sixers will score in the clutch when Wilt will get fouled with his 42% FT. So you think Cunningham is going to carry the load? Not while Scottie Pippen is bottling him up.


Chet Walker was probably the 60's version of Mark Aguirre. A guy who had a good career but just never did anything outstanding. That's why he's not in the Hall of Fame. You could probably make a case against Issel being in. BUT Issel did have one of the best ABA careers outside of Dr. J and George McGinnis. And even after the 77 merger, Issel still was averaging 20 ppg six times after that. Walker only averaged more than 20 ppg in a season only 3 times in his career. And as far as George Gervin, Gervin was one of the best scorers in NBA history. Yeah, he played no defense BUT let me repeat, he was one of the best scorers in NBA history. What statement can you say that Chet Walker was one of the greatest _________ in NBA history? I can't think of one. That's why he's not in the hall. And that's why one of the best defensive players in NBA history and best all-around forwards ever to play in Scottie Pippen is. 1996 was one of Pippen's best seasons. So yeah, he'd eat Chet Walker for lunch.


As I stated before, the 67 Sixers would get swept by any modern-era(post 1980) team on this list.

Against the 86 Celtics? With 4 hall of fame players? Two in their primes(Bird, McHale) and two still effective(Parish, DJ). If Chet gets eaten alive by Scottie Pippen, Bird is going to swallow him whole and spit him out offensively. Chet could attack him on the other end, but then McHale switches on Walker and his scoring stops. And nobody's stop McHale in the post. Luke Jackson nor Wilt. Wilt was a defensive presence but never a great one-on-one defender. Which McHale will make him since Wilt does have to worry about McHale in the post. Not even close against them. The 67 Sixers would get trounced against this team.

Against the 87 Lakers? Their line-up was just too big. Four guys in their starting line-up OVER 6'9"! The Sixers only had TWO guys on the entire roster 6'9" and taller. And these tall guys on the Lakers aren't your everyday stiffs. Magic(6'8") and Worthy(6'9") would run circles around the smaller Wally Jones(6'2") and Chet Walker(6'6"). And Wilt, as with McHale, would have to guard Kareem because he poses as a scoring threat. And Wilt would not be blocking the sky hook, so good luck with that.

I Can go on and on about the rest BUT the simple fact is that guys in the 60's didn't have the physical advantages that the modern day players do like weight training and dietary training. So I don't understand how you think a guy like Bill Russell would be able to hold his ground against Dwight Howard when Russell probably never picked up a barbell in his life AND Howard could probably bench press 250lbs easy?

Howard's strength wouldn't be that advantageous. Russell was 225 but played alot bigger than that. He would indeed beat Howard to his favorite spots and make him catch further than he wanted to. Howard has only three moves a running right hook, a quick spin for a lefty layup, and the offensive rebound. It will take more than that to shake Russ. Howard stronger than Wilt? No, and Wilt's moves were more reliable than Howard's. Shaq has the mass and the reliable moves to score on Russell though.

The 67 Sixers had four tremendous one on one scorers in Wilt, Greer, Walker, and Cunningham. They were all explosive enough to carry the load. If Wilt was being fouled for profit and Greer was being locked up by MJ then they would turn to Cunningham or Walker. You say Pippen is going to guard Cunningham? Who is going to guard Walker then, Kukoc? Not a prayer.

Walker was probably a bit better than Aguirre. His offense was extremely physical and eventually wore opponents down. There are lesser players than Chet that are already in the Hall. Issel was a no substance scorer for pedestrian teams. Gervin was charmin soft and he couldn't understand team basketball. GG's ineptitude in every other area practically canceled out his scoring prowess.

Pippen was a very good one on one defender but he truly specialized in team defense. Besides, Walker was too physical to be denied by Pippen. A sweep of the 67 Sixers would be almost impossible.
Bird couldn't defend one on one so Walker would have his way against his defense. Offensively, Bird would score his points against Chet for sure. McHale was the Celtics only power player so this match would be yet another volleyball game on the glass for the Sixers. And McHale would still score but he would be bodied by Jackson or Wilt. The Celtics' lack of power would be their downfall.

Magic was the only power player on the 87 Lakers squad and they relied on their fast break offense to score. The Sixers would control the boards and not allow their running game to really get started.