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

[Dice]

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

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.

Looks like were at a standstill on this discussion. BUT honestly, it has been refreshing.

Anyway, in that late game situation, you hoping Wilt gets an offensive rebound is something I would definitely want because most likely against the 96 Bulls, that ain't happening. The Bulls has one of the best rebounders in NBA history with Rodman, so he'll clear the defensive glass. And as I said, when the Bulls make you rely on the third and fourth scoring options, there is no chance.

I still don't see the advantage of the bench matchup against the Celtics when, as I stated many times, the tallest player coming off the bench is 6'6". You do realize that Walton came off the bench for the Celtics. A guy who is 6'11". Who's going to check him off their bench? Not seeing where this bench advantage is coming from when most of these guys who are 6'6" are not the size of the typical modern day PF. Yeah, Walton wasn't a 20 point scorer in 1986. BUT if he's being guarded by a 6'6" player, it'll be free candy for him to still post him down low and grab two. Or grab the offensive rebound(which he still was a pretty solid rebounder back then) and get the two from there.

And your right about the 87 Lakers matchup. If they put a defensive unit out there they loose some scoring. BUT as long as the huge advantage of the Magic mismatch belongs to the Lakers, I have no worries. They can go with a lineup of Magic-Cooper-Green-Thompson-Jabbar. Cooper checks Greer. Magic doesn't have to worry about Jones. Green, with his physical defense, checks Walker. Thompson grabs Wilt since(at least from my standpoint) Thompson is their better post defender. And Jabbar takes Jackson. Maybe Walker can score against Green. I'm not sure because as you describe Walkers game, he's physical. Well, so if Green.

All that cutting and slashing means nothing if Cunningham can't take LeBron off the dribble. Besides, out side of Greer, I don't see a lot of long range shooting on the Sixers teams to give Cunningham room to slash? Players are bigger, taller and have longer arms. This is not the 60's where players were shorter. We got too many guys in the league with 7'0" wingspans. And with that, you have no room to operate unless you got some long range bombers to open space. And from what I've read and heard, neither Jones nor Walker have the range to open up space.

[Jeffx]

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

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.

Hey Alex, don't forget "Downtown" Freddie Brown. Dude was money off the bench. They also had Lonnie Shelton(who my Knicks traded away of course), John Johnson at the 3, and old Paul Silas, who provided experience, rebounding and tough, physical play. They might have won back-to-back titles if DJ didn't have such a horrible Game 7 performance in '78.

Walton only had maybe two years of NBA greatness. If not for injuries, he'd be Top 10, IMO. At the top of his game, he played the center position as well as anybody. One of the best passing big men I've ever seen and one of the Top 5 greatest college players of all time.

[AlexBrady]

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

Looks like were at a standstill on this discussion. BUT honestly, it has been refreshing.

Anyway, in that late game situation, you hoping Wilt gets an offensive rebound is something I would definitely want because most likely against the 96 Bulls, that ain't happening. The Bulls has one of the best rebounders in NBA history with Rodman, so he'll clear the defensive glass. And as I said, when the Bulls make you rely on the third and fourth scoring options, there is no chance.

I still don't see the advantage of the bench matchup against the Celtics when, as I stated many times, the tallest player coming off the bench is 6'6". You do realize that Walton came off the bench for the Celtics. A guy who is 6'11". Who's going to check him off their bench? Not seeing where this bench advantage is coming from when most of these guys who are 6'6" are not the size of the typical modern day PF. Yeah, Walton wasn't a 20 point scorer in 1986. BUT if he's being guarded by a 6'6" player, it'll be free candy for him to still post him down low and grab two. Or grab the offensive rebound(which he still was a pretty solid rebounder back then) and get the two from there.

And your right about the 87 Lakers matchup. If they put a defensive unit out there they loose some scoring. BUT as long as the huge advantage of the Magic mismatch belongs to the Lakers, I have no worries. They can go with a lineup of Magic-Cooper-Green-Thompson-Jabbar. Cooper checks Greer. Magic doesn't have to worry about Jones. Green, with his physical defense, checks Walker. Thompson grabs Wilt since(at least from my standpoint) Thompson is their better post defender. And Jabbar takes Jackson. Maybe Walker can score against Green. I'm not sure because as you describe Walkers game, he's physical. Well, so if Green.

All that cutting and slashing means nothing if Cunningham can't take LeBron off the dribble. Besides, out side of Greer, I don't see a lot of long range shooting on the Sixers teams to give Cunningham room to slash? Players are bigger, taller and have longer arms. This is not the 60's where players were shorter. We got too many guys in the league with 7'0" wingspans. And with that, you have no room to operate unless you got some long range bombers to open space. And from what I've read and heard, neither Jones nor Walker have the range to open up space.

I suppose I would be banking on the combined assault of Wilt and Jackson to eventually take a toll on Rodman. Rodman was like a 6 space rebounder which is just crazy. Well, Walker and Cunningham were great at what they did (Walker on the baseline and Cunningham slashing).
Walton would have been a dynamic player against Gambee. Even in his dotage, Bill could still rebound, pass, and score. Good call there.

Magic would have penetrated, posted, and gotten to the free throw line but I don't like that team in a slowed down game. They were all about early offense situations and then going to Kareem as a secondary option. Walker would score against Green since his power leaning style was tough to guard, though Green was a grinder.

Cunningham was quick laterally so I think he could take on LeBron's forward leaning defense. And LBJ certainly ball watches and isn't a terrific box out guy. Greer was an automatic shooter, Jones' jumper was a bit off and on, Cunningham wasn't a good jump shooter yet, Walker had okay range on the baselines. Still, they won because their power game created so many easy shots.

Dice, this has been a fun exercise.

[Dice]

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

Yes this has. Although I disagree with a lot of your points, it still lends to good basketball conversation and not just outlandish, "My team is good because we were just that good period!"

I guess you infatuation of 'power' teams might lend to what I feel couldn't succeed into the modern game. And especially against the modern great teams. The one thing that I question with that Sixers team is their shooting and their ability to score one-on-one.

I'm assuming with shooters, you got Greer, and to a limited extent Walker(probably because of his range) and Jones(as you stated, streaky). And Cunningham, as you described, is limited in his range as well. Not sure about Costello, Guokas, Melicionni but I assume they have range as well. And I trust that Gambee is just a banger so we can nullify his shooting prowess? So basically, in the starting line-up, you only have two reliable shooters in Greer and Walker. One may have decent range and the other has good range inside 15 feet. So if we're playing with current day rules, Wilt's going to see a zone in his face all day. Which means, shooters become a premium. And since there is only one long range threat in Greer, basically you play a box-in-one and have Jordan shadow him. I'll take my chances with Walker shooting beyond 15 ft. So if you start putting in the bench guys to get more shooting, you basically loose your height since the guards are only 6'1". The Bulls would feast defensively. I'd doubt if Cunningham's 'slashing' would make a difference in a zone. And Gambee would be utterly useless since all he can do is bang.

Now maybe if they played with illegal defense rules, the 67 Sixers might have a chance to pull out one game. Because at that point, If Wilt makes the right reads on the double teams, then they might get some efficient scoring. Cunningham's cutting ability might be somewhat of a factor. HOWEVER, here is the problem for the Sixers. You put Rodman on Wilt and you let him play with the defensive rules of pre-modern day, which means hand checking allowed and no flagrant fouls, and Wilt might not be much of a factor. Rodman would basically frustrate Wilt to no end and Wilt might not play within himself to and take him out of his game. So you take out your best player and Greer and Walker will try to score against the teeth of the Bulls defense in Jordan and Pippen. Not good.

That's what made the Bulls such a great defensive team. They dominated defensively in an era where hand checking was not allowed BUT still playing non-zone rules. But the way the Bulls were constructed, they would have killed teams defensively if they were allowed to play zone. With their length and athletic ability, I just don't see a smallish Sixers team beating them with current day rules. And even if they played with the rules in 1967, Wilt would not be able to handle Rodman's physical play. The best example of what the Bulls would do to the Sixers is what they did to the Orlando Magic that year. Similar style. Not saying that they had more power than the Sixers but their offensive revolved around their center in Shaq. A guy who's style is comparable to Wilt. Now here are some major differences, the Magic had an all around guard in Penny Hardaway. Greer, in my estimations, probably wasn't the type of threat Hardaway was that year. BUT the Bulls pretty much handled them with ease. A team who was taller, better shooters, and had a big monster in the middle, wasn't a match for the 96 Bulls.

[AlexBrady]

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

Yes this has. Although I disagree with a lot of your points, it still lends to good basketball conversation and not just outlandish, "My team is good because we were just that good period!"

I guess you infatuation of 'power' teams might lend to what I feel couldn't succeed into the modern game. And especially against the modern great teams. The one thing that I question with that Sixers team is their shooting and their ability to score one-on-one.

I'm assuming with shooters, you got Greer, and to a limited extent Walker(probably because of his range) and Jones(as you stated, streaky). And Cunningham, as you described, is limited in his range as well. Not sure about Costello, Guokas, Melicionni but I assume they have range as well. And I trust that Gambee is just a banger so we can nullify his shooting prowess? So basically, in the starting line-up, you only have two reliable shooters in Greer and Walker. One may have decent range and the other has good range inside 15 feet. So if we're playing with current day rules, Wilt's going to see a zone in his face all day. Which means, shooters become a premium. And since there is only one long range threat in Greer, basically you play a box-in-one and have Jordan shadow him. I'll take my chances with Walker shooting beyond 15 ft. So if you start putting in the bench guys to get more shooting, you basically loose your height since the guards are only 6'1". The Bulls would feast defensively. I'd doubt if Cunningham's 'slashing' would make a difference in a zone. And Gambee would be utterly useless since all he can do is bang.

Now maybe if they played with illegal defense rules, the 67 Sixers might have a chance to pull out one game. Because at that point, If Wilt makes the right reads on the double teams, then they might get some efficient scoring. Cunningham's cutting ability might be somewhat of a factor. HOWEVER, here is the problem for the Sixers. You put Rodman on Wilt and you let him play with the defensive rules of pre-modern day, which means hand checking allowed and no flagrant fouls, and Wilt might not be much of a factor. Rodman would basically frustrate Wilt to no end and Wilt might not play within himself to and take him out of his game. So you take out your best player and Greer and Walker will try to score against the teeth of the Bulls defense in Jordan and Pippen. Not good.

That's what made the Bulls such a great defensive team. They dominated defensively in an era where hand checking was not allowed BUT still playing non-zone rules. But the way the Bulls were constructed, they would have killed teams defensively if they were allowed to play zone. With their length and athletic ability, I just don't see a smallish Sixers team beating them with current day rules. And even if they played with the rules in 1967, Wilt would not be able to handle Rodman's physical play. The best example of what the Bulls would do to the Sixers is what they did to the Orlando Magic that year. Similar style. Not saying that they had more power than the Sixers but their offensive revolved around their center in Shaq. A guy who's style is comparable to Wilt. Now here are some major differences, the Magic had an all around guard in Penny Hardaway. Greer, in my estimations, probably wasn't the type of threat Hardaway was that year. BUT the Bulls pretty much handled them with ease. A team who was taller, better shooters, and had a big monster in the middle, wasn't a match for the 96 Bulls.

Power teams are almost always able to get very easy shots and extra shots in any given posession. Hard to stop a team when they are getting 2 cracks at it. The Sixers had four terrific one on one scorers in Wilt, Walker, Cunningham, and Greer. Goukas and Melcionni could make long range jumpers. For their style of play, they had enough shooting.

A box and one defense is highly succeptible to offensive rebounds since there are no block out rules. Volleyball time. Wilt and Jackson were deadly screeners which would free up Cunningham and Greer. They would also swing Wilt to the foul line and collapse the box leaving openings for cutters (Cunningham's speciality). In any case, its highly doubtful the Bulls resort to a junk defense that would pay few dividends.

Wilt faced plenty of terrific defenders in his career. Nate Thurmond, Bill Russell, Zelmo Beatty, Clifford Ray, and Willis Reed. These guys were bigger, stronger, and banged harder than Rodman did so its highly improbable that Wilt would be so rudely pushed around. Rodman could get into Karl Malone's head, but Malone was a loser who folded in tough situations. Wilt wasn't that fragile.

Rodman wasn't a powerhouse and would be outweighed by about 60 lbs. Indeed, Longley would have to play him but he didn't have the lateral or vertical quickness to really bother Wilty. The Bulls did have a great defense due to their length and quickness, but not power. Rodman only played against carefully selected centers, Wilt wasn't someone he would have success against.

The 96 Magic couldn't carry the 67 Sixers' gym bags, and add these facts. Shaq was never a good defender or rebounder. Penny Hardaway was a flash player who overhandled, didn't defend, and was useless in the clutch. Greer was far better. In addition, the Magic lacked any bench support and of course the Sixers featured the great Billy Cunningham. The Magic were a bogus team, so its little surprise that the Bulls smashed them.

[Jistic]

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

Just got this actual issue and read it yesterday. Michael Cooper says the 86-87 Lakers would've swept this Bulls team.

The 2nd Bulls championship team also made the top 10.

[Dice]

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

Power teams are almost always able to get very easy shots and extra shots in any given posession. Hard to stop a team when they are getting 2 cracks at it. The Sixers had four terrific one on one scorers in Wilt, Walker, Cunningham, and Greer. Goukas and Melcionni could make long range jumpers. For their style of play, they had enough shooting.

A box and one defense is highly succeptible to offensive rebounds since there are no block out rules. Volleyball time. Wilt and Jackson were deadly screeners which would free up Cunningham and Greer. They would also swing Wilt to the foul line and collapse the box leaving openings for cutters (Cunningham's speciality). In any case, its highly doubtful the Bulls resort to a junk defense that would pay few dividends.

Wilt faced plenty of terrific defenders in his career. Nate Thurmond, Bill Russell, Zelmo Beatty, Clifford Ray, Bob Lanier, Willis Reed. These guys were bigger, stronger, and banged harder than Rodman did so its highly improbable that Wilt would be so rudely pushed around. Rodman could get into Karl Malone's head, but Malone was a loser who folded in tough situations. Wilt wasn't that fragile.

Rodman wasn't a powerhouse and would be outweighed by about 60 lbs. Indeed, Longley would have to play him but he didn't have the lateral or vertical quickness to really bother Wilty. The Bulls did have a great defense due to their length and quickness, but not power. Rodman only played against carefully selected centers, Wilt wasn't someone he would have success against.

The 96 Magic couldn't carry the 67 Sixers' gym bags, and add these facts. Shaq was never a good defender or rebounder. Penny Hardaway was a flash player who overhandled, didn't defend, and was useless in the clutch. Greer was far better. In addition, the Magic lacked any bench support and of course the Sixers featured the great Billy Cunningham. The Magic were a bogus team, so its little surprise that the Bulls smashed them.

So now Rodman's weight is an issue? OK, when I posted my concerns about Bill Russell's weight against guys like Shaq and Dwight Howard, you came back with the 'he had deceptive strength'. So your saying Rodman wasn't as strong as he looks now because of his weight? Not following that argument at all. Rodman is one of the best pound for pound rebounders in NBA history. In his era, he's battled guys like Barkley, Malone, Olajuwon and Robinson for rebounding titles and won majority of them. And as much as you praised Russell for being a guy who can beat a bigger guy to a spot in the post, Rodman was one of the best I've seen do this. He played well against guys like Shaq, Mourning and Ewing. All of them all-star centers. Ewing a hall of famer. And Shaq soon to be hall of famer. So you can use the weight issue as a negativity against Rodman post strength but not for Russell? Not buying that contradiction at all.

And for what you said about Karl Malone folding in tough situations, I can't disagree with you on that one. BUT let me ask you this, as great of a player Wilt has been how many times has he come up short of a championship when his team needed him? For a guy who suppose to be a All-time top 5 player, him having two rings is kind of short. So considering the level of player Wilt has been, he was one of the worst when it came to being clutch. All I kept reading about was all those game 7 looses he endured. From loosing to the Celtics. And especially to the Knicks in 1970 when Reed had one leg and Dave DeBusschere was guarding Wilt for most of the game. Yes, I know DeBusschere was a great defender BUT still. Wilt was considered one of the greatest. He should have shredded him. And if DeBusschere can do that to Wilt, I have no reason to believe that Rodman couldn't do the same.

[AlexBrady]

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

So now Rodman's weight is an issue? OK, when I posted my concerns about Bill Russell's weight against guys like Shaq and Dwight Howard, you came back with the 'he had deceptive strength'. So your saying Rodman wasn't as strong as he looks now because of his weight? Not following that argument at all. Rodman is one of the best pound for pound rebounders in NBA history. In his era, he's battled guys like Barkley, Malone, Olajuwon and Robinson for rebounding titles and won majority of them. And as much as you praised Russell for being a guy who can beat a bigger guy to a spot in the post, Rodman was one of the best I've seen do this. He played well against guys like Shaq, Mourning and Ewing. All of them all-star centers. Ewing a hall of famer. And Shaq soon to be hall of famer. So you can use the weight issue as a negativity against Rodman post strength but not for Russell? Not buying that contradiction at all.

And for what you said about Karl Malone folding in tough situations, I can't disagree with you on that one. BUT let me ask you this, as great of a player Wilt has been how many times has he come up short of a championship when his team needed him? For a guy who suppose to be a All-time top 5 player, him having two rings is kind of short. So considering the level of player Wilt has been, he was one of the worst when it came to being clutch. All I kept reading about was all those game 7 looses he endured. From loosing to the Celtics. And especially to the Knicks in 1970 when Reed had one leg and Dave DeBusschere was guarding Wilt for most of the game. Yes, I know DeBusschere was a great defender BUT still. Wilt was considered one of the greatest. He should have shredded him. And if DeBusschere can do that to Wilt, I have no reason to believe that Rodman couldn't do the same.

Rodman's weight wasn't an issue, but against legendary strongmen it would be. Rodman had decent strength in his 6'7 frame but it was his incredible athleticism that made all the difference. Rodman could certainly beat a guy to his spot and root them out.

I said that Shaq would score his points against Russell but that Howard would struggle. Howard doesn't know how to carve out position in the post, doesn't have a really powerful ***, and doesn't have reliable moves. Howard isn't as strong as Shaq, not even close. Russell generated more power through his 6'10 frame than Rodman did.

For sure, Wilt should have won more than two rings. He was intimidated by Reed in a game 7 and he inexplicably took some games off in the playoffs. DeBusschere was physically stronger than Rodman but Wilt was defeated mentally after Reed made his first couple jumpers. Good point.

Still, for the 72 Lakers, Wilt proved that he was a winner after all by cutting down his scoring in favor of rebounding, defending, passing, and screening. In the end, Wilt's two rings tower over Malone's spectacular collapses.

[AgentQ16]

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

How about the 83 Sixers... dominated and swept the Lakers. Moses would be tough to stop and you had Doc, D Player of the Year B Jones. Toney from the outside. That team wouls have won 70 games if they didn't shut it down in the last 2 weeks to rest. They were 57-9 going into the last month of the season.

IMO though, the 84-85 Lakers were the best. Had more depth than most teams.

[AlexBrady]

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

How about the 83 Sixers... dominated and swept the Lakers. Moses would be tough to stop and you had Doc, D Player of the Year B Jones. Toney from the outside. That team wouls have won 70 games if they didn't shut it down in the last 2 weeks to rest. They were 57-9 going into the last month of the season.

IMO though, the 84-85 Lakers were the best. Had more depth than most teams.

That 83 Sixers team featured too many inferior players. Marc Iavaroni was the starting power forward and he was a mediocre player. Their perimeter shooting wasn't very good as Toney was the only threat from out there. And aside from Bobby Jones, their bench was very thin.

[nightcreeper]

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

90-91 Chicago Bulls

[AgentQ16]

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

That 83 Sixers team featured too many inferior players. Marc Iavaroni was the starting power forward and he was a mediocre player. Their perimeter shooting wasn't very good as Toney was the only threat from out there. And aside from Bobby Jones, their bench was very thin.

Tell that to the Lakers who got swept 4-0. A Lakers team that featured:

Kareem
Magic
Worthy
McAdoo
Wilkes
Cooper
Nixon
Rambis

[jfsolo]

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

Tell that to the Lakers who got swept 4-0. A Lakers team that featured:

Kareem
Magic
Worthy
McAdoo
Wilkes
Cooper
Nixon
Rambis

Worthy missed the whole playoffs that year with a broken leg, McAdoo missed two games from the championship series, and so did Nixon. Neither of those two guy were anywhere near full strength in the games they did play in. So the Lakers were really, thin in that series.

[AlexBrady]

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

Tell that to the Lakers who got swept 4-0. A Lakers team that featured:

Kareem
Magic
Worthy
McAdoo
Wilkes
Cooper
Nixon
Rambis

James Worthy was down for the count with a broken leg. Nixon had that bad collision in game 1 and seperated his shoulder. McAdoo had that bad thigh and missed a couple Finals games as well. Talk about a beaten up team.

[23]

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

First ever the best is..... thread that deserves 5 stars. This is great, and im learning as I read