[crusaderhoops10]

Quote: Originally Posted by crandolph

Mr. Kennedy.....read Bill Simmon's book, huh???..........anyways, i like the article. But In your summary before the list, you said each team needed two superstars. Big man and a slasher. How about and NBA MVP with an unstoppable shot and a guy who once averaged a triple-double. Like the list, but you forgot the 1970-71 Bucks. Kareem and The Big O. Thats all you need.

Of course I read it and I couldn't help using the term "Magic 2.0" in a piece like this.

There should of been an honorable mention section of this article. Obviously '83 Sixers, '71 Bucks and '67 Sixers would be on it. But as I'm sure you all can tell, this wasn't a list of the best teams in NBA history otherwise I'd of gone with the '86 Celtics instead of '87.

The '67 Sixers definitely are up there, I just didn't go with them because I was already using a Wilt team at number 1 (I know, lame excuse). I mean, it would be pretty boring if every team on the list was one that Wilt played for just because he was so dominant. That's why I didn't do a list of the best video game teams from the 90's because they all would have been Jordan's Bulls.

Here's the reasons why I left off the '83 Sixers and '71 Bucks.

NBA video games would have been obsessed with Lakers and Celtics by 1983. There's no way that before the Sixers even won the title would that team have been rated as well as LA or Boston. Plus, both LA and Boston would have had big men that could have matched Moses in video games, even though Moses dominated in real life.

The dominance that came with those Sixers teams all started with Moses and I doubt that video games would have captured that with Kareem on LA's teams and the bigs in Boston. Moses dominating the glass the way he did is kind of like Barkley when it comes to video games. Try creating a 6'6'' Barkley and grabbing 14 boards a game in a video game. It doesn't happen, height matters too much, hence the '86 Rockets and a 7'4'' Sampson being so valuable.

As for the '71 Bucks, Big O wasn't enough for me as a slasher that late in his career. And right after the Knicks won the title, you know everyone on that Knicks team would have been rated in the 80's a la an '06 Spurs team. The Bucks wouldn't have been the best rated team on that game.

But both of those teams were definitely on my mind along with the Knicks teams and late 80's Pistons.

It's funny though how no one argues for the team that won 11 titles. Maybe because their best player probably would have been rated a 90 even though somehow we should have found a way to rate him a 115 with a computer glitch not allowing him to lose big games.