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

[Dice]

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

Howard has bigger biceps but Wilt generated more power throughout his body. And if Howard is so strong how come he was so thoroughly pushed around by Jason Collins and Kendrick Perkins in back to back playoff appearances? Cunningham would probably have a bigger point advantage than three against Kukoc.

I wouldn't exactly say Collins pushed him around. He did go 27-15 in the Hawks series. NOW Perkins might be different because Perkins at the time was one of the best post defenders in the league. And even at that standpoint, he did post 22-11 numbers.

Walker wouldn't be locked down by Pippen. I like the power versus quickness matchup for Chet. For sure, Scottie would record nice offensive stats. Chet Walker is one of the best of all time at using his body to create space, in devestating fashion i might add. Gervin was a very good finesse scorer but his lack of long range shooting keeps him out of the inner circle of elite scorers.
A total shutdown of Walker wouldn't be possible. Too determined and too strong. Only Rodman could limit him but that would open up the boards even more.

I'm still not understanding this love for Walker. And especially against a guy who's a hall of famer at the peak of his career. Walker was good BUT not great. Even in 1967. Pippen was an all time great and 1996 was one of his best seasons. And that's offensively and defensively.

The Celtics couldn't control the boards against the Sixers. Parish had long arms but Wilt was longer. McHale and Jackson is a wash (as far as board/overall power). Bird was stronger than he looked but give Walker the power edge. Walker and Jackson not being enshrined in the Hall of Fame is a moot point.

Boston was the best rebounding team in 1986. And they controlled the boards against the Rockets. A team with two 7'0" in Olajuwon and Sampson. And Houston was the 3rd best rebounding team in the league. Not understanding the logical behind how a team of the caliber of the 86 Celtics would get beat on the boards by a 'power' team?

When it comes to the Lakers, the Sixers power would trump their height. Plus, whoever Worthy, Magic, and Scott guarded would have little difficulty scoring. Their running game was their everything. Without it, they would be in big trouble. Their half court offense was basically playing off Kareem in the post.

Yes, height does matter. especially when you know how to use it. And the 87 Laker definitely knew how to use it. Magic would be a mismatch against anybody on that team. And the Lakers bench had more impact guys than the Sixers. The Sixers had Cunningham and that was it. The Lakers had Cooper, Thompson and Rambis. It's just a case of being outnumbered.

[Lt.Dan]

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

Daaaa Bulls!

[Dice]

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

AlexBrady, are you an... older fellow? That's the only reason I can think of you claiming the 67 Sixers could beat all of these great modern teams.

Either that. Or like I said, he's reading too many Charlie Rosen columns.

[AlexBrady]

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

I wouldn't exactly say Collins pushed him around. He did go 27-15 in the Hawks series. NOW Perkins might be different because Perkins at the time was one of the best post defenders in the league. And even at that standpoint, he did post 22-11 numbers.


I'm still not understanding this love for Walker. And especially against a guy who's a hall of famer at the peak of his career. Walker was good BUT not great. Even in 1967. Pippen was an all time great and 1996 was one of his best seasons. And that's offensively and defensively.




Boston was the best rebounding team in 1986. And they controlled the boards against the Rockets. A team with two 7'0" in Olajuwon and Sampson. And Houston was the 3rd best rebounding team in the league. Not understanding the logical behind how a team of the caliber of the 86 Celtics would get beat on the boards by a 'power' team?


Yes, height does matter. especially when you know how to use it. And the 87 Laker definitely knew how to use it. Magic would be a mismatch against anybody on that team. And the Lakers bench had more impact guys than the Sixers. The Sixers had Cunningham and that was it. The Lakers had Cooper, Thompson and Rambis. It's just a case of being outnumbered.

Howard's play against Collins (a very good post defender) was not good at all. His numbers look good because he got alot of easy scores against the other defenseless Hawks. And his assist to turnover ratio was abysmal. Howard only scored against Perkins when he beat him to his spot. Otherwise, Howard couldn't hold his ground against Perkins and create makeable shots.

Pippen was the better player for sure but its all about matchups. Walker had a power advantage and would wear Pippen's chest to a nub. Theres no disputing that Scottie had a great season in 96.

Olajuwon and Sampson were finesse bigs. Yeah, they were long but they couldn't match the power of Wilt and Jackson. Oh, and Sampson was soft. Houston didn't have much rebounding besides those two either. And Boston had Walton and Wedman who were still decent rebounders. Boston was good on the boards, too bad Philly was all time good.

Magic was always a matchup problem so thats nothing new. Dave Gambee was an impact player for the Sixers and was a one board every four minutes guy. Cunningham's explosive scoring is the great equalizer. Although, I did always like Mychal Thompson's unselfishness he wasn't much of a defender or rebounder. Cooper and Rambis weren't capable of scoring like Cunningham.

AlexBrady, are you an... older fellow? That's the only reason I can think of you claiming the 67 Sixers could beat all of these great modern teams.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I'm much older than you guys. They were the most powerful team of all time and that is the advantage they would have against modern teams.

[bamalam]

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

67 sixers lost twice to the banged-up warriors in the finals that year, not sure how they would do against a lot of other teams mentioned here

and watching clips from the finals and vs the celtics, the whole legue sucked at defense. it looks like watching high school defense-not much physical play

ive seen high school church league games with more physical defnsive play than what i saw i n those finals videos

[Dice]

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

Howard's play against Collins (a very good post defender) was not good at all. His numbers look good because he got alot of easy scores against the other defenseless Hawks. And his assist to turnover ratio was abysmal. Howard only scored against Perkins when he beat him to his spot. Otherwise, Howard couldn't hold his ground against Perkins and create makeable shots.

Pippen was the better player for sure but its all about matchups. Walker had a power advantage and would wear Pippen's chest to a nub. Theres no disputing that Scottie had a great season in 96.

Olajuwon and Sampson were finesse bigs. Yeah, they were long but they couldn't match the power of Wilt and Jackson. Oh, and Sampson was soft. Houston didn't have much rebounding besides those two either. And Boston had Walton and Wedman who were still decent rebounders. Boston was good on the boards, too bad Philly was all time good.

Magic was always a matchup problem so thats nothing new. Dave Gambee was an impact player for the Sixers and was a one board every four minutes guy. Cunningham's explosive scoring is the great equalizer. Although, I did always like Mychal Thompson's unselfishness he wasn't much of a defender or rebounder. Cooper and Rambis weren't capable of scoring like Cunningham.

I'm still not getting how Russell would keep Howard out of his spot without some sort of weight. Collins is 7'0" at 250. Perkins is 6'11' at 280. Russell was 6'9" and 215. Tell me how a 215 pound player is going to keep Howard out of his spot? Everybody used to say that about Shaq. "Just keep him from getting to his spot". The problem was, you can't. If you would have told me that a modern day center who weighed in at 215 that kept Howard from his spot, then I'd be more inclined to believe you. Right now, it's all speculation.

Power advantage has no bearing to the overall advantage. Pippen during his time has faced many 'power' swingmen. Xavier McDaniel. Mark Aguire. Anthony Mason. Guys who were probably much more 'bruising' than Chet Walker. And yes, Pippen would have problems with a guy like McDaniel early in the 92 playoff series BUT he did ultimately get the best of McDaniel in the end.

And how does the 67 Sixers be an 'all time great rebounding team' when they didn't even lead the league in rebounding that year? Rick Barry had a better rebounding average than Luke Jackson and Jerry Sloan had more total rebounds than Jackson. And Jackson is supposedly the second best rebounder on the team. And please don't give me the excuse of 'He played with Wilt' on why his rebounding numbers was down. Because Barry played with Nate Thurman. And Barry still had a better average than Jackson. And as much as you discredit Boston for being a 'finesse' team, that team was long, smart and taller. 'Power' team or not, when you got a team like the 86 Celtics who maximize their big height advantage and mix that in with smart basketball and great long range shooting, that Sixer team has no chance. Wilt is not going to guard Parish and McHale at the same time. Both who are legit scoring threats. So who ever Jackson is going to guard, he's going to get killed defensively.

And yes, the Magic matchup problem is nothing new. But when your comparing this team to the 87 Lakers, that'll be the biggest mismatch between both teams. Wilt would probably win the Kareem matchup BUT it ain't even close with who ever is guard Magic and that's a problem. In basketball, when you have a sizeable mismatch like that, it's hard to cover that up. And the Sixers don't have that type of advantage against the Lakers. Their best player in Wilt, probably has a 'slight' advantage. And in what world do you live in where Dave Gambe is an "impact player"? You do realize he's a 6'6" power forward AND him going against the Lakers 6'9" guys will nullify any chance of him getting rebounds. AC Green(6'9") AND Kurt Rambis(6'8") will eat him for lunch on the glass. Cooper will lock down Cunningham defensively, so there goes Cunningham's scoring. And the Sixers has no answer for Thompson off the bech since they have nobody taller than 6'6". So there goes the bench matchup for the Sixers. Advantage: Lakers.

And I don't know if you watched the same Mychal Thompson I watched BUT Thompson was a SOLID low post defender. Much like in the mold of Kendrick Perkins. So I'm not sure where your getting that from. Maybe you watched too much of 1991 Mychal Thompson and not enough of 1987 Thompson.

[Jeffx]

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

This is always tricky ranking the best teams but here is how I see it.

1. 1995-1996 Bulls
2. 1966-1967 76ers
3. 1971-1972 Lakers
4. 1991-1992 Bulls
5. 1964-1965 Celtics
6. 1983-1984 Celtics
7. 1988-1989 Pistons
8. 2000-20001 Lakers
9. 1969-1970 Knicks
10. 1986-1987 Lakers

These lists are always subjective. The older fans will see things differently than the younger ones. I'd put Wilt's Sixers first. I'd take out the '89 Pistons, '00 Lakers and substitute the '70-'71 Bucks and the '82-'83 Sixers. Moses Malone was a friggin' wrecking ball that year. And what about the '84-'85 Lakers?

Two teams I always had a soft spot for were the '76-'77 Blazers and the '78-'79 Sonics. You talk about a finely-tuned unit, they defined it. Funny thing is, Portland was better the year AFTER they won the title. At one point their record was 50-10, but injuries killed their chances for a repeat.

[AlexBrady]

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

I'm still not getting how Russell would keep Howard out of his spot without some sort of weight. Collins is 7'0" at 250. Perkins is 6'11' at 280. Russell was 6'9" and 215. Tell me how a 215 pound player is going to keep Howard out of his spot? Everybody used to say that about Shaq. "Just keep him from getting to his spot". The problem was, you can't. If you would have told me that a modern day center who weighed in at 215 that kept Howard from his spot, then I'd be more inclined to believe you. Right now, it's all speculation.

Power advantage has no bearing to the overall advantage. Pippen during his time has faced many 'power' swingmen. Xavier McDaniel. Mark Aguire. Anthony Mason. Guys who were probably much more 'bruising' than Chet Walker. And yes, Pippen would have problems with a guy like McDaniel early in the 92 playoff series BUT he did ultimately get the best of McDaniel in the end.

And how does the 67 Sixers be an 'all time great rebounding team' when they didn't even lead the league in rebounding that year? Rick Barry had a better rebounding average than Luke Jackson and Jerry Sloan had more total rebounds than Jackson. And Jackson is supposedly the second best rebounder on the team. And please don't give me the excuse of 'He played with Wilt' on why his rebounding numbers was down. Because Barry played with Nate Thurman. And Barry still had a better average than Jackson. And as much as you discredit Boston for being a 'finesse' team, that team was long, smart and taller. 'Power' team or not, when you got a team like the 86 Celtics who maximize their big height advantage and mix that in with smart basketball and great long range shooting, that Sixer team has no chance. Wilt is not going to guard Parish and McHale at the same time. Both who are legit scoring threats. So who ever Jackson is going to guard, he's going to get killed defensively.

And yes, the Magic matchup problem is nothing new. But when your comparing this team to the 87 Lakers, that'll be the biggest mismatch between both teams. Wilt would probably win the Kareem matchup BUT it ain't even close with who ever is guard Magic and that's a problem. In basketball, when you have a sizeable mismatch like that, it's hard to cover that up. And the Sixers don't have that type of advantage against the Lakers. Their best player in Wilt, probably has a 'slight' advantage. And in what world do you live in where Dave Gambe is an "impact player"? You do realize he's a 6'6" power forward AND him going against the Lakers 6'9" guys will nullify any chance of him getting rebounds. AC Green(6'9") AND Kurt Rambis(6'8") will eat him for lunch on the glass. Cooper will lock down Cunningham defensively, so there goes Cunningham's scoring. And the Sixers has no answer for Thompson off the bech since they have nobody taller than 6'6". So there goes the bench matchup for the Sixers. Advantage: Lakers.

And I don't know if you watched the same Mychal Thompson I watched BUT Thompson was a SOLID low post defender. Much like in the mold of Kendrick Perkins. So I'm not sure where your getting that from. Maybe you watched too much of 1991 Mychal Thompson and not enough of 1987 Thompson.

Russell was 6'10 225 and had deceptive strength, way stronger than he looked. The size of his biceps was irrelevant. Russ would do anything to win including horsing a guy in the post. Howard's moves are incredibly predictable so Russ would block his fair share. Shaq had more strength and mass than Howard and he had a huge *** which allowed him to carve out prime space. No comparison between Howard and Shaq.

Walker was better than those three guys. His banging, leaning style would not have been denied by Pippen. Rodman could handle Walker though.

San Francisco played at a break neck pace and casted up many more shots than the Sixers did (which obviously meant more available rebounds), it didn't hurt to have the indomitable Thurmond either. Likewise, Boston put up 200 more shots than the Sixers did and finished with only 2 rebounds more. In truth, Philly cleaned the boards better than both teams.

Rebounding average is less important than per minute averages. In 1967, Barry grabbed 1 rebound for every 4.4 minutes. While Jackson grabbed 1 rebound for every 3.3 minutes. Indeed, the only reason Barry's total number was higher was because he played 10 more minutes per game. By the way, Sloan grabbed 1 rebound for every 4 minutes, again he simply played more than Jackson.

The 86 Celtics were long, intelligent, and did have a great front line but they just didn't have the power. Parish rarely scored in the fourth quarter and wasn't the same guy in 86. McHale was incredible and would command Jackson's full attention. Bird would have dropped some long range jumpers as well. But Greer would have destroyed Danny Ainge and Cunningham would have been too much for any of the subs or starters to handle. And of course, the Sixers would have pounded the Celtics from pillar to post due to the power advantage.

Magic would of had his way of course but Scott and Worthy wouldn't have scored big since their running game would never get going. Kareem would drop his hooks but Wilt was younger. Wilt and Jackson would totally control the boards since Worthy and Kareem were never very good rebounders. Oh, and 4 of the Lakers starters were below average defenders (besides Green). Gambee was a tough bruiser and grabbed a rebound every 4 minutes. Its highly doubtful he would get eaten for lunch since he would be paired with Jackson or Walker. Cooper would contain Cunningham but who will guard Greer? Scott, that isn't happening. Thompson was a talented scorer but he would only sting the Sixers defense. I say Cunningham finds a way to score more points than Thompson (be it on swift cuts or offensive rebounds).

You just made me a believer in Mychal Thompson's defense.

[Dice]

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

Russell was 6'10 225 and had deceptive strength, way stronger than he looked. The size of his biceps was irrelevant. Russ would do anything to win including horsing a guy in the post. Howard's moves are incredibly predictable so Russ would block his fair share. Shaq had more strength and mass than Howard and he had a huge *** which allowed him to carve out prime space. No comparison between Howard and Shaq.

Walker was better than those three guys. His banging, leaning style would not have been denied by Pippen. Rodman could handle Walker though.

San Francisco played at a break neck pace and casted up many more shots than the Sixers did (which obviously meant more available rebounds), it didn't hurt to have the indomitable Thurmond either. Likewise, Boston put up 200 more shots than the Sixers did and finished with only 2 rebounds more. In truth, Philly cleaned the boards better than both teams.

Rebounding average is less important than per minute averages. In 1967, Barry grabbed 1 rebound for every 4.4 minutes. While Jackson grabbed 1 rebound for every 3.3 minutes. Indeed, the only reason Barry's total number was higher was because he played 10 more minutes per game. By the way, Sloan grabbed 1 rebound for every 4 minutes, again he simply played more than Jackson.

The 86 Celtics were long, intelligent, and did have a great front line but they just didn't have the power. Parish rarely scored in the fourth quarter and wasn't the same guy in 86. McHale was incredible and would command Jackson's full attention. Bird would have dropped some long range jumpers as well. But Greer would have destroyed Danny Ainge and Cunningham would have been too much for any of the subs or starters to handle. And of course, the Sixers would have pounded the Celtics from pillar to post due to the power advantage.

Magic would of had his way of course but Scott and Worthy wouldn't have scored big since their running game would never get going. Kareem would drop his hooks but Wilt was younger. Wilt and Jackson would totally control the boards since Worthy and Kareem were never very good rebounders. Oh, and 4 of the Lakers starters were below average defenders (besides Green). Gambee was a tough bruiser and grabbed a rebound every 4 minutes. Its highly doubtful he would get eaten for lunch since he would be paired with Jackson or Walker. Cooper would contain Cunningham but who will guard Greer? Scott, that isn't happening. Thompson was a talented scorer but he would only sting the Sixers defense. I say Cunningham finds a way to score more points than Thompson (be it on swift cuts or offensive rebounds).

You just made me a believer in Mychal Thompson's defense.

SO do you really believe that if there is 2:00 left in a close game against any of these modern teams that Wilt is going to get the ball with his horrendous FT shooting?

Against the Bulls, that means Greer is going to have to score against Jordan. Don't see it. And then, the great Chet Walker trying against Pippen. Not happening. That means Luke Jackson is going to have to score against Rodman. Good luck. So you got Cunningham, who you'll have to bring in for 'I have no idea who' and he gets locked up either by one of the three: Jordan, Pippen, Rodman. No option there as well.

So you look at the Boston matchup. Greer will be bottled up when DJ is guarding him. Walker would have McHale hounding him. And Jackson is left to score against Parish. And so once again, Cunningham will have to come in and probably have McHale in his face.

The Lakers might be a better matchup in the close game 2:00 scenario. Greer could score against Scott BUT Cooper can come in and lock that down in a second. Walker would probably get his points against Worthy. I don't see Jackson getting much against Green. And if you bring in Cunningham, you can bring in Cooper to stop him. Which means Greer will be guarded by Scott. So basically, take Cooper on the better scorer and take your chances against the other.

So you get the idea. When Wilt is your best player with his FT shooting, you cannot go to him in the clutch. Which means Greer is the guy that needs to step up and with each of these teams you got ace perimeter defenders(Jordan,Pippen,DJ,Cooper) to lock him up. I'd take my chances against their 3rd or 4th options. And most likely will probably win at that.

And I'm still trying to understand how a guy like Cunningham, who is a 6'6" power forward, is going to score against modern day PF's. How is going to score against modern day SF's? You do realize that a guy like LeBron James or a Luol Deng would lock up Cunningham is he was playing today.

[AlexBrady]

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

SO do you really believe that if there is 2:00 left in a close game against any of these modern teams that Wilt is going to get the ball with his horrendous FT shooting?

Against the Bulls, that means Greer is going to have to score against Jordan. Don't see it. And then, the great Chet Walker trying against Pippen. Not happening. That means Luke Jackson is going to have to score against Rodman. Good luck. So you got Cunningham, who you'll have to bring in for 'I have no idea who' and he gets locked up either by one of the three: Jordan, Pippen, Rodman. No option there as well.

So you look at the Boston matchup. Greer will be bottled up when DJ is guarding him. Walker would have McHale hounding him. And Jackson is left to score against Parish. And so once again, Cunningham will have to come in and probably have McHale in his face.

The Lakers might be a better matchup in the close game 2:00 scenario. Greer could score against Scott BUT Cooper can come in and lock that down in a second. Walker would probably get his points against Worthy. I don't see Jackson getting much against Green. And if you bring in Cunningham, you can bring in Cooper to stop him. Which means Greer will be guarded by Scott. So basically, take Cooper on the better scorer and take your chances against the other.

So you get the idea. When Wilt is your best player with his FT shooting, you cannot go to him in the clutch. Which means Greer is the guy that needs to step up and with each of these teams you got ace perimeter defenders(Jordan,Pippen,DJ,Cooper) to lock him up. I'd take my chances against their 3rd or 4th options. And most likely will probably win at that.

And I'm still trying to understand how a guy like Cunningham, who is a 6'6" power forward, is going to score against modern day PF's. How is going to score against modern day SF's? You do realize that a guy like LeBron James or a Luol Deng would lock up Cunningham is he was playing today.

You're right about Wilt's miserable free throw shooting. Hopefully the offensive rebounds he gets he is able to finish through or before contact. Yeah, Greer wouldn't score his average against Jordan. And Harper would limit Wali Jones. I like the Walker matchup against Pippen especially in the endgame. Jackson wasn't relied on to score and he wouldn't against Rodman. He would get alot of putback chances though.

The Sixers would move Greer to the point in the endgame since Jones wouldn't be very effective against Harper. Cunningham would play the 2 or 3 and Kukoc would be forced to guard him. Jordan would play Greer, Pippen on Walker, and Rodman on Wilt.

DJ would harrass Greer but Jones would be more effective against Ainge since he wouldn't have to turn his back on the offense (DJ's speciality). Walker would be played by Bird and Chet would have his way. Jackson and Wilt would sieze control of the boards. Cunningham wouldn't be handled by Bird or McHale. The Sixers would have a sizeable lead in the 4th quarter due to their tremendous bench and power advantage.

Theres only one Cooper. He can't guard Greer and Cunningham at the same time. Worthy would be dominated by Jackson on the boards and Wilt was more active than Kareem. For the Lakers to field a strong defensive lineup they would lose too much scoring. And the games would be played at a grinding pace which favors Philly.
Philly has four explosive scorers. Boston and Los Angeles don't have enough stoppers. Cunningham could jump higher than Deng and his swift cuts and lively rebounding would confound young LeBron.

[AlexBrady]

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

These lists are always subjective. The older fans will see things differently than the younger ones. I'd put Wilt's Sixers first. I'd take out the '89 Pistons, '00 Lakers and substitute the '70-'71 Bucks and the '82-'83 Sixers. Moses Malone was a friggin' wrecking ball that year. And what about the '84-'85 Lakers?

Two teams I always had a soft spot for were the '76-'77 Blazers and the '78-'79 Sonics. You talk about a finely-tuned unit, they defined it. Funny thing is, Portland was better the year AFTER they won the title. At one point their record was 50-10, but injuries killed their chances for a repeat.

The 71 Bucks were another finesse team and they had a slow mo gameplan. Kareem didn't have much power and he would usually wear down by the endgame. Dandridge and Greg Smith were too small and would be overpowered by the best teams.
Moses Malone was a beastly rebounder but I never liked his game. His selfishness prohibited him to pass and his defense could be had.

I liked those teams too. Gus Williams and Dennis Johnson were unbelievable and Sikma was flashing his greatness as well. The Blazers had those two way superstars in Walton and Lucas. Good defense and a total commitment to team. That was too bad about Walton's stress fracture.

[23]

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

I must applaud you guys for having a real bball discussion about the players and the game, and no talking about none of the nonsense that goes on alot now.

There are alot of Nuggets in alot of the posts you guys are making...

BTW, isnt it amazing that Bill Walton played his entire career with a messed up spine

[Jistic]

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

I must applaud you guys for having a real bball discussion about the players and the game, and no talking about none of the nonsense that goes on alot now.

That's cuz we're talkin old school, when all that mattered was the game.

[AlexBrady]

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

I must applaud you guys for having a real bball discussion about the players and the game, and no talking about none of the nonsense that goes on alot now.

There are alot of Nuggets in alot of the posts you guys are making...

BTW, isnt it amazing that Bill Walton played his entire career with a messed up spine

No doubt, you guys have tremendous passion for the game. I'm very impressed.

[23]

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

yes...now all that means is we need you guys posting more lol

No kidding, tons of history and real player sill analysis in here...kudos


@jistic truth

@Alex....agreed sir