2010 Lakers vs 1996 Bulls, seven game series.

[TE]

Epic series. Lakers would dominate in the middle, and of course, with Kobe they'd give the Bulls backcourt a run for their money. But how could you forget MJ and Pippen, along with Rodman, Harper, Kerr, Luc Longley, among others.








My prediction, Bulls in 6. Only because of course, MJ.


Discuss............ :wakeup

[lefty]

Here we go .... :bang

[stretch]

Bulls probably are the most balanced team ever. They definitely were not the most talented team around (2010 Lakers >>> 1996 Bulls in terms of pure talent) , but they just had such great chemistry on both ends of the court, and executed on both ends better than any other team ever.

Bulls in 6, maybe 5.

[J.T.]

Should have just made this thread Michael vs Kobe one on one first to 20 who wins

[TE]

Should have just made this thread Michael vs Kobe one on one first to 20 who wins

I'd like this to be a more team oriented discussion.

[Quit Hatin']

jordan never played against a ron artest type defender, the one that bodies up on you. He would try to wear him down. kobe on the other hand would also have trouble against scottie. gasol, bynum, and odom off the bench is too much length for the bulls. Guys like harper and kukoc would have to step it up big time. all in all if the lakers have homecourt they win in 7.

[stretch]

jordan never played against a ron artest type defender, the one that bodies up on you. He would try to wear him down. kobe on the other hand would also have trouble against scottie. gasol, bynum, and odom off the bench is too much length for the bulls. Guys like harper and kukoc would have to step it up big time. all in all if the lakers have homecourt they win in 7.

Artest isnt going to hold Jordan. Pierce was pretty much able to have his way with Artest last night, he just missed some shots he would normally hit, and took a few bad ones. Artest is physical, but has very average lateral quickness. MJ would be too crafty for Artest with his mix of driving and post-up ability. IMO Artest's defense gets overrated. Superstars torch him on a regular basis. He can shut down average players that dont know how to take the physical contact, but if you have a guy like Kobe, Bron, Melo, Pierce, Wade, etc... and they are on a mission to score, Artest is pretty much toast, and always has been because he has such poor lateral quickness.

At the same time, Pippen isn't going to hold Kobe much either. Like I said, when you have a superstar on a mission to score, it's impossible for anyone to hold them one-on-one. The only reason guys like MJ, Kobe, etc... would have a hard time scoring one-on-one is not because of the defense, but because of their own will (or perhaps lack of).

The Lakers may have great length, but a lot of it is negated for a few reasons. For one, the Bulls have Rodman. I strongly doubt that Odom, Bynum, or Gasol are going to be able to stop him from dominating the boards. Gasol and Bynum are too fragile, and Odom is just too lazy to consistently do it. Also, Luc Longley was a solid shooter. He would take opposing big men out of the middle to allow Jordan and Pippen to get to the hoop at will, and if they played off of Longley, he would bust their ass with a wide open jumper.

I think the general balance of the Bulls would just be too much for the Lakers, despite their obvious advantage in talent.

[Medvedenko]

I can see this going 7 with a coin flip to win.

[Leetonidas]

Is this a troll thread? The 72-10 Bulls, the greatest team ever, against the under 60 win Laker team from this season with no bench? Bulls have two top 50 players ever to the Lakeshow's 1 and they also have the GOAT who would both lock down Kobe and eat his lunch on the other end of the floor. Jordan + Pippen defending Kobe = Kobe 25 points on 34 shots or something ridiculous.

Bulls in 5.

[Medvedenko]

Is this a troll thread? The 72-10 Bulls, the greatest team ever, against the under 60 win Laker team from this season with no bench? Bulls have two top 50 players ever to the Lakeshow's 1 and they also have the GOAT who would both lock down Kobe and eat his lunch on the other end of the floor. Jordan + Pippen defending Kobe = Kobe 25 points on 34 shots or something ridiculous.

Bulls in 5.

Young Kobe schooled Pippen, so that statement doesn't stick.

The Lakers have inside and outside to combat the Bulls. Still a coin flip as both run the same O and defensive stoppers, go to guys and nice blend of vets and young cats as roleplayers.

[ChrisRichards]

LA has the size but Jordan and Pippen would shut Kobe down making him ineffective in the series. I also believe Rodman would contain Gasol. That alone should convince you that the Bulls would easily win this in 5 games.

[dbreiden83080]

96 Bulls

Very easy. 6 games max..

[Medvedenko]

LA has the size but Jordan and Pippen would shut Kobe down making him ineffective in the series. I also believe Rodman would contain Gasol. That alone should convince you that the Bulls would easily win this in 5 games.

In 5 games eh.....I forgot that team swept every play off series they played in....

The Bulls that year didn't have 2 post options to contain and never faced anyone as good as Kobe during that run. While Rodman is great, he couldn't score and would be zoned off, if zones are legal as they are now. That's the difference right there.

Also the Odom effect would sway the series. Coin toss anyways.

[pauls931]

There's getting to be some real shitty trolls these days...

[Medvedenko]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/199606160CHI.html

Look at the great MJ in 3 close out games and his #'s after they went up 3-0 on the Sonics.
Like I've been saying, it's like this team is so legendary and MJ can't do wrong. I watched those games and just like the Lakers today, they win as a team. Yes, a game here and there both Kobe and MJ go off, but they need help.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

jordan never played against a ron artest type defender, the one that bodies up on you. He would try to wear him down. kobe on the other hand would also have trouble against scottie. gasol, bynum, and odom off the bench is too much length for the bulls. Guys like harper and kukoc would have to step it up big time. all in all if the lakers have homecourt they win in 7.


Generally the 72 win team has homecourt over the 57 win team.

[TE]

There's getting to be some real shitty trolls these days...

Your judgement is critically flawed.

[TinTin]

Your judgement is critically flawed.

I apologize for him. He meant you are a shitty troll

[JamStone]

jordan never played against a ron artest type defender, the one that bodies up on you. He would try to wear him down. kobe on the other hand would also have trouble against scottie. gasol, bynum, and odom off the bench is too much length for the bulls. Guys like harper and kukoc would have to step it up big time. all in all if the lakers have homecourt they win in 7.

Yes he did. Dennis Rodman. Rodman wasn't as strong as Artest is, but he played a similar style of man defense. And back then, when Jordan went up against those Bad Boys Pistons, they could hand check and they could knock Jordan down without worrying about a flagrant foul every time. Jordan faced one of the toughest defenses in the history of the league.

When Kobe and the Lakers faced tough defenses in their prime, they got dismantled twice, in 2004 and 2008.


I will say this about the original topic. While this is somewhat of a troll topic, I think a seven game series between the two teams would be much closer than a lot of people would care to admit. As great as that Chicago Bulls team was, they didn't face a really outstanding and well balanced front court the current Lakers have. They faced good individual front court players like Shaq and Shawn Kemp and Patrick, but the Lakers have size, strength, length, and skill all along the front court. Those Bulls didn't face a front court like that. And that's why I think it would be closer than some assume it would be. Dennis Rodman can't guard both big spots, and I think Rodman would have a much tougher time on Gasol than some suggest. Gasol doesn't just have size and length on Rodman, but skill. Rodman can take away size and strength with the way he played defense using leverage and grit. But taking away Gasol's skill advantage as well would be a much tougher assignment for Dennis. And if Scottie's on Kobe, that means Jordan is on Artest, who won't light Jordan up but will bang his body some on the Lakers offensive end.

I'd give the edge to the Bulls because of Michael. But I would suspect it would be a much more competitive series than a lot of people would imagine. For that matter, I think the 2008 Boston Celtics give that Bulls team a run for their money as well, for similar reasons.

[TE]

I apologize for him. He meant you are a shitty troll

I ain't trollin. It's a hypothetical matchup question dumbass.

[stretch]

Young Kobe schooled Pippen, so that statement doesn't stick.

funny how kobe fans always say that because while its true, its also incorrect because he was schooling pippen over 3 years after the 95-96 season. pippen was getting pretty old by then.

i dont agree that Jordan and Pippen would completely lock Kobe up like some people think, but i think Kobe would have a harder time dealing with the two of them defending him, as opposed to Jordan having a hard time against Kobe and Artest defending him.

[stretch]

The Bulls that year didn't have 2 post options to contain and never faced anyone as good as Kobe during that run. While Rodman is great, he couldn't score and would be zoned off, if zones are legal as they are now. That's the difference right there.

yeah, a zone is really smart when you have guys like Tony Kukoc or Steve Kerr sitting around at the 3pt line, waiting for passes from MJ and Pippen as they slice through LA's very average defense.

[stretch]

For that matter, I think the 2008 Boston Celtics give that Bulls team a run for their money as well, for similar reasons.

I didn't want to admit it before mainly because I was hating on KG, but those 2008 Celtics is without question one of the best teams in NBA history, and has been getting overlooked a lot in these "greatest teams" discussion. that was a damn good team. lockdown defense. great ball movement on offense, balance in that several players could score 20-30 any given night in different ways, and a player that is pretty much unstoppable in clutch situations (Pierce). I think they definitely could give those Bulls a tough fight, perhaps even beat them.

[Medvedenko]

yeah, a zone is really smart when you have guys like Tony Kukoc or Steve Kerr sitting around at the 3pt line, waiting for passes from MJ and Pippen as they slice through LA's very average defense.

It's not about playing Zone per se, it's zoning the paint as you sag off of Rodman.

The only way I see the 96 bulls team win is because of their better 3 point shooters overall. Still, it would be very, very close. Look at the stats that playoff run in 96.

[dirk4mvp]

Generally the 72 win team has homecourt over the 57 win team.

:lmao

[Muser]

Quit Hatin' just got regulated tbh.

[MaNu4Tres]

Lakers would win in 6. IMO

[stretch]

It's not about playing Zone per se, it's zoning the paint as you sag off of Rodman.

The only way I see the 96 bulls team win is because of their better 3 point shooters overall. Still, it would be very, very close. Look at the stats that playoff run in 96.

Typical Lakerfan, just looking at total talent level, thinking talent wins everything. :rolleyes

[DazedAndConfused]

I didn't want to admit it before mainly because I was hating on KG, but those 2008 Celtics is without question one of the best teams in NBA history, and has been getting overlooked a lot in these "greatest teams" discussion. that was a damn good team. lockdown defense. great ball movement on offense, balance in that several players could score 20-30 any given night in different ways, and a player that is pretty much unstoppable in clutch situations (Pierce). I think they definitely could give those Bulls a tough fight, perhaps even beat them.

Haha you're such a butthurt faggot.

Mavs suck, Dirk sucks, Celtics are going to lose. Go ahead and kill yourself now faggot.

LAKERS ARE THE BETTER TEAM AND WOULD HAVE WON IN '08 IF THEY HAD BYNUM AND ARIZA HEALTHY. FACT.

* on the '08 Celtics championship.

[BullsDynasty]

This thread is a joke right? The 1999 Spurs team would beat these Lakers....

[Venti Quattro]

Bulls in 7.

[TampaDude]

The 1996 Bulls were fucking ridiculous.

Bulls in 6, max.

[Giuseppe]

This thread is a joke right? The 1999 Spurs team would beat these Lakers....

You'd be satisfied to steal that $100 Rivers and the Celtics hid up in the rafters at Staples.

[Smooth Criminal]

Is this a troll thread? The 72-10 Bulls, the greatest team ever, against the under 60 win Laker team from this season with no bench? Bulls have two top 50 players ever to the Lakeshow's 1 and they also have the GOAT who would both lock down Kobe and eat his lunch on the other end of the floor. Jordan + Pippen defending Kobe = Kobe 25 points on 34 shots or something ridiculous.

Bulls in 5.
Those Bulls were definitely not the best team ever.
They played in a watered down league.
The '91 and '92 Bulls were better,as were the Three-Peat Lakers (2001 especially, GOAT Team Candidate), and the '86 Celtics (GOAT Team Candidate), and the '80s Lakers.

[Smooth Criminal]

Haha you're such a butthurt faggot.

Mavs suck, Dirk sucks, Celtics are going to lose. Go ahead and kill yourself now faggot.

LAKERS ARE THE BETTER TEAM AND WOULD HAVE WON IN '08 IF THEY HAD BYNUM AND ARIZA HEALTHY. FACT.

* on the '08 Celtics championship.
Stop being a bitch, you're making the rest of us Laker fans look bad. They were better in 2008, we've been better since.

[Kamala]

Holy shit. This would put 1996 Phil Jackson against 2010 Phil Jackson and result in some Back to the Future shit.

On second thought it would probably result in some gay ass Jean Claude Van Damme vs. Jean Claude Van Damme Double Impact shit

[Gutter92]

Jordan would lock down Kobe while getting his on the other end. Lakers would win one game and consider themselves lucky.

[mingus]

Haha you're such a butthurt faggot.

Mavs suck, Dirk sucks, Celtics are going to lose. Go ahead and kill yourself now faggot.

LAKERS ARE THE BETTER TEAM AND WOULD HAVE WON IN '08 IF THEY HAD BYNUM AND ARIZA HEALTHY. FACT.

* on the '08 Celtics championship.

and the Lakers wouldn't have won in '00 had Duncan not been injured for the playoffs.

* on the '00 Lakers championship.

[mingus]

obviously, i'm fucking around. i'm fully aware of the fact that when you use the asterisk it is code for "i'm a butt-hurt little bitch."

[JamStone]

Those Bulls were definitely not the best team ever.
They played in a watered down league.
The '91 and '92 Bulls were better,as were the Three-Peat Lakers (2001 especially, GOAT Team Candidate), and the '86 Celtics (GOAT Team Candidate), and the '80s Lakers.

I agree with that comment I bolded. People often look at the 72 regular season wins and assume they were some untouchable team.

Statistically, that was the worst playoffs Michael Jordan had as well in the 6 championship runs. In 9 of the 18 playoff games that season, he shot under 45% from the field. Four times, he shot under 40% from the field. He also didn't get double digit rebounds or assists even once in any of those 18 playoff games. And the teams those 96 Bulls played in the playoffs weren't all that great. The league was weak that year. The best they played was probably the New York Knicks in the second round.

I agree a couple of those first three-peat Bulls were better than the historical 72 win 1996 Bulls.

[JoeTait75]

They played in a watered down league.

That's absolutely true. 1995-96 was an expansion year and the league was watered down. Not to mention the East was really bad that season outside Chicago and Orlando. The Cavaliers had a dogshit team that year and still won 47 games and had HCA in the first round of the Playoffs.

[BullsDynasty]

I agree with that comment I bolded. People often look at the 72 regular season wins and assume they were some untouchable team.

Statistically, that was the worst playoffs Michael Jordan had as well in the 6 championship runs. In 9 of the 18 playoff games that season, he shot under 45% from the field. Four times, he shot under 40% from the field. He also didn't get double digit rebounds or assists even once in any of those 18 playoff games. And the teams those 96 Bulls played in the playoffs weren't all that great. The league was weak that year. The best they played was probably the New York Knicks in the second round.

I agree a couple of those first three-peat Bulls were better than the historical 72 win 1996 Bulls.

Yet despite those setbacks the Bulls still managed to win which further shows how great of a team they were even in the eve of all those negatives you pointed out. A typical team in today's era with those setbacks you mentioned would simply lose.

[JamStone]

Or it's a reflection of the caliber of competition, which has been pointed out several times in the last few posts.

[BullsDynasty]

Or it's a reflection of the caliber of competition, which has been pointed out several times in the last few posts.

How do you know that those teams were not good or not as competitive in today's standards. What are you basing this off of? Because the Bulls got 72 wins they automatically played in a watered down league?

[JoeTait75]

How do you know that those teams were not good or not as competitive in today's standards. What are you basing this off of? Because the Bulls got 72 wins they automatically played in a watered down league?

It was an expansion year. It was a watered-down league almost by definition.

[BullsDynasty]

It was an expansion year. It was a watered-down league almost by definition.

Doesn't necessarily mean the league was less competitive than it is now.

[JamStone]

The Seattle Sonics won 64 games that year. That team in today's league are a borderline 50 win team. They had two great players in GP and Shawn Kemp. Couple of good role players with Detlef and Hersey Hawkins and Sam Perkins. Good scoring team. Not a lot of depth. And other than Kemp, not a lot of athleticism. They'd be a good team in today's league. They wouldn't win 64 win games, imo.

The Orlando Magic won 60 games that year. Also a great duo with Shaq and Penny. Went to the Finals also in a relatively weak league. They'd probably be the fourth best Eastern Conference team this past season.

It's an opinion. You're free to disagree with it. 1996 was not a strong year in the NBA in terms of competition. 72 wins is 72 wins. But you can go deeper than just win-loss records to realize that the league was not nearly as strong as it was in the 80s and early 90s.

[JMarkJohns]

This thread (or the reasons behind its existence) makes me laugh. In reality, however, it's quite sad.

[BullsDynasty]

The Seattle Sonics won 64 games that year. That team in today's league are a borderline 50 win team. They had two great players in GP and Shawn Kemp. Couple of good role players with Detlef and Hersey Hawkins and Sam Perkins. Good scoring team. Not a lot of depth. And other than Kemp, not a lot of athleticism. They'd be a good team in today's league. They wouldn't win 64 win games, imo.

The Orlando Magic won 60 games that year. Also a great duo with Shaq and Penny. Went to the Finals also in a relatively weak league. They'd probably be the fourth best Eastern Conference team this past season.

It's an opinion. You're free to disagree with it. 1996 was not a strong year in the NBA in terms of competition. 72 wins is 72 wins. But you can go deeper than just win-loss records to realize that the league was not nearly as strong as it was in the 80s and early 90s.

IMO you argument is irrelevant, The Orlando Magic this year won 61 games and all they had was Dwight Howard. If this year's magic can get 61 games, then 96 sonics can get 60+ games in today's league. Same can be said about the Cavaliers. All they have is Lebron James with a couple of good role players and still managed to win 60+ wins.

The 90's had Karl Malone, Patrick Ewing, John Stockton, Clyde Drexler, Charles Barkley, Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Hakeek Olajuwon, David Robinson, Shaquille O'neal etc. If you were to rank the top 10 players in each position in NBA history or perhaps top 5, you can bet all or most of these players listed would make the list showing how powerful the league was that year. The same cannot be said about today's league.

[JamStone]

Like I said, it's an opinion. You disagree with it, fine. I disagree with yours.

We're stuck at an impasse with no concrete way to determine a resolution.

So be it.

The 1996 championship Bulls were a great team in a weak league.

Your opinion differs. Oh freaking well...

edit: and having great individual players in the league doesn't mean the league was strong. Having great teams in the league means the league is strong. Only a few of the stars you mentioned played on great teams in 1996. It would be like mentioning Dwyane Wade as an all time great so that means the Miami Heat made the NBA a stronger league. It's just not a congruent argument.

[Darrin]

Epic series. Lakers would dominate in the middle, and of course, with Kobe they'd give the Bulls backcourt a run for their money. But how could you forget MJ and Pippen, along with Rodman, Harper, Kerr, Luc Longley, among others.








My prediction, Bulls in 6. Only because of course, MJ.


Discuss............ :wakeup

Well, that team didn't face a lot of frontline talent. It wasn't like they faced the Knicks with Ewing in his prime and Oakley, Charles Smith, Antony Mason, etc. The is the era where you had one good frontline player and that was it. So it's difficult to gauge whether the Bulls could handle the Lakers upfront. However, mentally, I think the Bulls hunger and pursuit of the ball would leave Bynum and Odom flat-footed. If they set their defense, the Bulls would get all the rebounds. And that could be the difference. Bynum can get rattled and he needs someone to get in his ear to get him to pursue the ball after a couple of misses. That is all Rodman was. Gasol gets rattled before a shot if you play him tough, and he does stupid things after that. Odom backs away from those type of challenges. They are a skilled frontline, but the Bulls would beat them up with their speed, defense, and mental focus. You can frustrate them.

The Lakers would have to shove everything down low and keep Rodman's hands off the ball. Pound them inside.

Artest is a wild-card. There's too much evidence that he's an emotional hot-head. He idolizes Jordan and that would push himself to do well. That can sometimes can work against him. So, I'm sure how effective he would be, but so far in this postseason, he's not shown any of that temperment.

Kobe gets the edge for me here early because Jordan's competitiveness had a downside against great players. He would blow off the system if his guy went off, and Kobe and the Lakers love that.

Fisher is out-matched, but it seems to work for them. I think Harper and Jordan as a tandem would be on Kobe 90% of the time he's out there. Kobe wouldn't get a moment's rest and fatigue could play a factor in whether he wins the matchup in the overall game. But it is Jordan, and Kobe would be up to the challenge, he would see it as an opportunity.

Fish would have to hit all of his shots and he's going to give up size to Harper running off-ball. It would be difficult for him not to lose a step on Harper. He played well with Jordan.

I give the edge to the Bulls and it may not be close. 4-1 Bulls. And I hate this Bulls team.

[DazedAndConfused]

This current Laker team is pretty good, but they are nowhere near GOAT status IMHO.

I would like to see the '01 Lakers against the '96 Bulls though. IMHO that matchup wouldn't be close. Prime Shaq, Kobe, Horry, Fox, Fisher.....one of my all time favorite Laker teams.

[TE]

This current Laker team is pretty good, but they are nowhere near GOAT status IMHO.

I would like to see the '01 Lakers against the '96 Bulls though. IMHO that matchup wouldn't be close. Prime Shaq, Kobe, Horry, Fox, Fisher.....one of my all time favorite Laker teams.

That would be a good match up. One for the gipper.

[TDMVPDPOY]

Bulls in 4

[JamStone]

Even with Rodman on the Bulls, I think the current Lakers kill that 96 Bulls team on the glass. Rebounding alone makes the series a lot closer than a 4-5 game series some suggest.

[21_Blessings]

This current Laker team is pretty good, but they are nowhere near GOAT status IMHO.
.


85 and 87 Lakers would thrash those Bull teams.

I think the 2010 Lakers would give 01 Lakers a run for their money. Gasol/Odom would wear the shit out of Horry. Kobe is a smarter offensive player than he was back then.

Ron and Kobe will go down as one of the scariest perimeter defenses ever when it's all said and done. This core will flirt with a 4-peat imo.

[spursfaninla]

ha ha

[Mr. Body]

85 and 87 Lakers would thrash those Bull teams.

I think the 2010 Lakers would give 01 Lakers a run for their money. Gasol/Odom would wear the shit out of Horry. Kobe is a smarter offensive player than he was back then.

Ron and Kobe will go down as one of the scariest perimeter defenses ever when it's all said and done. This core will flirt with a 4-peat imo.

Wow, I haven't seen this thread until now. It's gold. GOLD.

[bdubya]

It's all down to the refs. If the series is played with 2010 refs, Bulls in 7. With 1996 refs, Bulls sweep.

[Phillip]

Ron and Kobe will go down as one of the scariest perimeter defenses ever when it's all said and done. This core will flirt with a 4-peat imo.

lol both guys getting raped by a slow, broken down Paul Pierce

[Muser]

I think the 2010 Lakers would give 01 Lakers a run for their money. Gasol/Odom would wear the shit out of Horry. Kobe is a smarter offensive player than he was back then.


The same Odom that is getting punked by fat baby? :lmao




Ron and Kobe will go down as one of the scariest perimeter defenses ever when it's all said and done.

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

[BUMP]

85 and 87 Lakers would thrash those Bull teams.

I think the 2010 Lakers would give 01 Lakers a run for their money. Gasol/Odom would wear the shit out of Horry. Kobe is a smarter offensive player than he was back then.

Ron and Kobe will go down as one of the scariest perimeter defenses ever when it's all said and done. This core will flirt with a 4-peat imo.

:rollin:rollin:rollin:rollin:rollin