1992 Chicago Bulls vs 1996 Chicago Bulls

[Dice]

Quote: Originally Posted by st0rmb11

Ok, I'll address the 1986 Celtics matchup first. Jordan (at 23) with NO ONE around him, couldn't be contained by the Celtics. By himself, Jordan led the Bulls to some close games with that team. I do think Pippen could control Bird one on one (and by control, I mean hold him in the low 20s). Jordan wouldn't have a bit of trouble with Johnson, Harper would handle Ainge quite well. Parrish would have his way with Longley, but I do think Rodman could manage McHale. It would basically come down to what the benches did. The Celtics had no one off the bench like Kukoc, and as stated many times in the original argument, Kukoc would be the X factor. as far as the '87 Lakers, it would be a better series. I'm sorry, but Rodman would own Green on the boards. I would go with Jordan on Magic. Let him try to use his quickness and intelligence to hold Johnson down. Have Harper on Scott. Kareem was certainly a better player than Longley (even at that age), but his age would come into play, as the Bulls would sub big men like Wennington, James Edwards, John Salley, & Jason Caffey to help on Jabbar. I say on defense, maybe consider Rodman on Worthy, and Pippen on Green. Or vice versa; either way. Cooper coming off the bench is the only bench player on any teams we've mentioned, that could hold down Kukoc. So that would be very interesting. Kurt Rambis would be a possible X factor, as he could match the intensity of Rodman. While I will admit that this would be a great series, I have to go Bulls. I feel like they could keep the Lakers from getting out and running as much, and no answer for Jordan. This series would most certainly not be 4-2 either way. I'd say it would go to an epic 7th game, that may even have an overtime or two. I'd say Bulls in 7 because game 7 would be in Chicago.

I think your underrating McHale and Worthy in the respective series.

I do think that the Bulls would be able to beat the Celtics. But I disagree that Rodman would be able to handle McHale. Next to Olajuwon, McHale had the best post moves I've seen from a post player. And yeah, Pippen might keep Bird under 20 points but he won't keep Bird from getting his 9+ rebs and 7-8 Assists. And the whole key to stopping Bird was stopping him in the clutch moments. Bird may only score 18 but he'll score most of them in the fourth quarter when the game is on the line. Jordan and Bird are the only players in history I want to see with the ball late in the game with the game on the line.

As far as the Lakers, Worthy would be a big problem. He was not called 'Big Game James' for nothing. And consider this, in the 1991 Finals Phil put Jordan on Magic and got Jordan into early foul trouble in the first two games. And this is when Jordan was in his prime and Magic was playing in his last season. Now go back to the 87 Lakers vs the 96 Bulls matchup. You got Magic in his prime against a 'still effective' Jordan but definitely past his prime. How do you think that will work? Maybe I might have under-estimated the Bulls but I still think they would loose in that 7th game.

[st0rmb11]

But you agree that it would come to a 7th game.

The thing is, maybe (and that's a big maybe) Jordan was past his defensive prime, but he was still 1st Team All-Defense his last 3 seasons (correct me if I'm wrong).

I could very well be underrating McHale and Worthy. I'm only 21, so I NEVER saw them play live. I've watched several replays of games and full game highlights of both teams before though. I would actually put McHale's post moves ahead of Olajuwan's. He wasn't nearly as athletic as Hakeem, but was still just as affective in the post with his moves.
Again, never actually SAW Worthy play, but I've seen several replays and clips of him to have an idea of what he can do. I do think that Rodman could at least contain him a little; at least enough to keep it close.

It's debates like this that make me wish it was possible to have a time machine and create these games. Go back to 1996, scoop up the whole 1996 Bulls team and coaching staff, then take them back to 1987, and get a game up between them and the Lakers.

[st0rmb11]

You know what, I'll make a new thread and change the debate. I'll take the 10 "greatest" teams of all-time (according to NBA.com), make a poll and thread, and we can all debate and vote on who we think would win a tournament(since that's basically what this has become...)


http://www.operationsports.com/forum...ournament.html

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dice

What about McHale? Who's going to lock him down? And then what about Parish? You say Longley? I don't think so. The 86 Celtics would give the 96 Bulls a serious run. And I honestly think that the 87 Lakers would beat the 96 Bulls in a 7 game series. Magic and Worthy would be a problem for the Bulls defensively. Everybody would assume that Pippen would guard Magic because of how he played him in the 1991 Finals. Now, that would be good but you run the risk of having Jordan cover Worthy. Which is not what you want because in 1987 Worthy was in his prime and because he was bigger than Mike he would take him in the post and get Mike into foul trouble early. Now you can have Jordan guard Green but then you run the risk of giving up offensive rebounds because Green will beat Jordan to the boards. Now you could just play them straight up and you just give up on the mismatches at the PG(Magic vs Haprer) and C(Longley vs Jabbar) and hope you could win the SF matchup(Pippen vs Worthy), which would be the deciding factor. On the other end, the Lakers obviously need to try and stop Jordan's scoring and Pippen's all round play. Jordan is going to win his matchup and Harper and Longley will loose theirs so they'll have to bank on the Pippen/Worthy matchup. Which will be close. Rodman will beat Green on the boards BUT Green , even as a young player back then, was savy on both sides of the ball. So the intangibles of Rodman and that of Green would also be brought to the table to decide. As for the benches, Bulls win this one. Not by much but they win. Now this is coming from a huge Bulls fan but I think that the Magic/Worthy problem is much more dangerous to the Bulls than the Jordan/Pippen problem for the Lakers. As I stated, the Pippen/Worthy matchup is the key and I think that can be won by Worthy. People forget that Worthy was a beast during that time. He was taking great defensive player at that time to school. I've seen great defensive players at that time, namely Kevin McHale and Rodney McCray, just get abused by Worthy. I say the 1996 Bulls loose to the 1987 Lakers 4-2. And like I said, this is coming from a die hard Bulls fan.

Defense wins championships and good defense overall was much better in 96 than 86 or 87... and the Bulls were one of the best defensive teams in the league, if not the best. The Showtime Lakers were far from a defensive team. I can't knock any of the one on one break downs, but as an overall team, I think the Lakers would need to put up 125 to 130 and I can see the Bulls stopping them from doing that. I don't see the Lakers holding the Bulls.

[st0rmb11]

The Lakers were actually a solid defensive team, it's just that their flashy, wide open, fastbreak offense got all of the attention. But they got those fastbreaks by their defense. Steals, making people miss shots, blocks.

[sportyguyfl31]

Gotta go with 1996 Bulls also.

Horace Grant was soft emotionally at that time, and Rodman would have gotten into his head.

1992 Bulls wouldnt have an answer for Toni, who was a fine offensive player.

[st0rmb11]

agreed. and you know, I keep seeing more votes for the 1992 team, but I really want someone to tell me why they voted for them. I want to see the case they make for them.

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by st0rmb11

The Lakers were actually a solid defensive team, it's just that their flashy, wide open, fastbreak offense got all of the attention. But they got those fastbreaks by their defense. Steals, making people miss shots, blocks.

The Lakers weren't a bad defensive team but the best defensive teams back then were about on par with the Mavs today. The Bad Boys brought true physicality to the NBA. Before them there wasn't as much contact. In 1996, they started putting in rules to tone that down a bit but the Lakers, I believe, were before that even started. The nature of the game and athletes involved would make it hard for me to really see any elite team of a later decade losing to a team of years past. It's kind of hard to compare eras as we all know.