would the jordan's bulls defeat the current Spurs??

[ashrafabdeljaber]

I know 80% of you are spurs fans but I want to know the truth from you guys and not answers based on your team favorite.

Which team is better Michael Jordan's Bulls or The current San Antonio Spurs

[TDMVPDPOY]

BRUCE bowen would slide his feet under jordan and you know the rest

spurs in 4

[JamStone]

stop the insanity

[Dalhoop]

The Bulls would win in six. Their defense was better, they had the right players at the right positions to slow the Spurs offense.

Jordan would take Parker, Pippen would take Manu, and Rodmen would take Duncan.

How would guard Jordan (Or try anyway), what about Pippen? Bowen could only guard one of them.

[Dex]

Could the Super Friends defeat the Spurs?

Discuss.

[lefty]

Could the Super Friends defeat the Spurs?

Discuss.

:lol :lol

[Mister Sinister]

Could the Super Friends defeat the Spurs?

Discuss.
Ra's al Ghul could.

[dirk4mvp]

uh yeah. what kind of dumbshit would think otherwise ?

[lefty]

Wait...

Nobody can beat our Fantastic Four to watch (courtesy of ABC-ESPN during tje Finals) :lol

[SANANTOJAMES]

Don't get me wrong, I love the spurs but there is no one on the spurs roster that could stop MJ.

[RC's Boss]

The '96 Bulls would beat anyone. Current Bulls would get the "Cavalier" treatment!

[mVp]

Could the Super Friends defeat the Spurs?

Discuss.

LOL

[SequSpur]

oh hell yeah.

[Roxsfan]

yes

[spursjustice]

The '96 Bulls would beat anyone. Current Bulls would get the "Cavalier" treatment!

I actually think the 91-92 Bulls are better than the 95-96 Bulls....

Regardless... Spurs lose...

[TDMVPDPOY]

bulls overrated

we can just adopt the same defensive crap we did to the suns play 5 on 2 or 5 on 1 and see jordan beat us while we shit on the rest

[saporvida]

i thought lebron was the new jordan and how did all that jazz end in the finals? now im not saying lebron had the supporting cast jordan had but i think, being the biased person i am, spurs would take them in 6.

ps: i will never go against the spurs no matter if this was teamUSA vs SPURS or bulls vs SPURS or clets of the past vs SPURS or.... get my point? SPURS fo'ever till i die!

[RC's Boss]

I actually think the 91-92 Bulls are better than the 95-96 Bulls....

Regardless... Spurs lose...
NOOOOOO! Harper, Pippen, Rodman, and the GOAT. That defense was a monster. They're the reason the game slowed down to a crawl in the mid 90's

[Indazone]

Could the Super Friends defeat the Spurs?

Discuss.

Dammit everyone knows the lamo SuperFriends could never defeat the Spurs. Now the X-Men with Storm, Wolverine, Cyclops, Jean Grey, Beast and Iceman..that's another story! :spin

[Indazone]

By the way the 92 Dream Team would wipe the floor with the 2007 Spurs.

[Mister Sinister]

Dammit everyone knows the lamo SuperFriends could never defeat the Spurs. Now the X-Men with Storm, Wolverine, Cyclops, Jean Grey, Beast and Iceman..that's another story! :spin
I call bullshit on that. Beast, Iceman, and Storm would be useless. Wolvey would puncture the ball, and Jean would go Phoenix and kill them all.

[Medvedenko]

Remember Phil Jackson....yeah that's right....

[exstatic]

You act like there was one Jordan Bulls championship team, when in fact there were six that were as different as our four, and spread out over only one less year. Some of those teams were monsters, but the last two that beat Utah weren't all that. If you put up the '07 Spurs team, I'd say we beat the last two, but lose to the other four Bulls squads.

[Switchman]

NOOOOOO! Harper, Pippen, Rodman, and the GOAT. That defense was a monster. They're the reason the game slowed down to a crawl in the mid 90's

And yet the spurs are boring for doing it too. Fuck that.

[spursreport]

IF the Bulls had stayed together for 99, they wouldnt have 4-peated. That would have been the only Bulls team that the Spurs would have beaten. The Bulls last stand was 98 breakup or not. The Pacers/Jazz were in position to beat them but they didnt execute well down the stretch. The Spurs mindset was much better than either one of those 2 teams and the Bulls were on their last legs.

[Rummpd]

It would be a war and it could go either way. Interesting when the Bulls were put in some computer simulations vs. other great teams they did not fare that well.

Bulls would probably win though due to todays rules would allow Jordan to score at will - he could have averaged 40+ a game with the soft rules in the NBA today.

[Oh, Gee!!]

What if we had the Iceman and D-Rob in their prime alongside T.D. and T.P.?

[ArgSpursFan]

If we could manage to have the 2005 Long haired Manu , the 2007 MVP parker together + a healthy Timmy,it would be the spurs the series winner,no doubt.

[Oh, Gee!!]

we'd also need the 1980's Baseline Bums and their crazy antics; then maybe we'd have a chance.

[mavs>spurs2]

If we could manage to have the 2005 Long haired Manu , the 2007 MVP parker together + a healthy Timmy,it would be the spurs the series winner,no doubt.
Maybe if in your dream Jordan also broke his leg

[stretch]

If we could manage to have the 2005 Long haired Manu , the 2007 MVP parker together + a healthy Timmy,it would be the spurs the series winner,no doubt.
Then in that case, how about a Jordan in his prime, Pippen in his prime, Rodman in his prime, Grant, Kukoc, and all the best role players from each of the teams, all put together on one squad?

And a healthy Tim, and Manu/Parker in their primes would still have NO chance against a trio of Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman. Manu and Parker would have been SHUT DOWN, and Rodman would annoy the hell out of Timmy. You must be retarded.

[2centsworth]

It's impossible to stop a player who would either score or go to the line. Plus, that player could swat other players out of his way without ever a foul being called.

You can't beat that!

[Dirk Nowitzki]

The only Bulls team that was the most vulnerable was the 98 team and in ways the 97 but not as much as the 98 team. That 98 team wouldnt have made it through the 99 season as champions simply because teams were starting to seriously catch up to them along with age. Like spursreport said that is the ONLY team that would have lost to the 99,03,05,07 Spurs. I actually agreed with spursreport? OMG :drunk :drunk :drunk

[The Franchise]

I would first like to say i'm a Spurs fan second only to the Rockets,but if anyone says the spurs would win you must be out of your damn mind.They had better D better shooters a deeper bench and the greatest.I know everyone here loves the Spurs but be realistic they might win one game.

[L.I.T]

I would first like to say i'm a Spurs fan second only to the Rockets,but if anyone says the spurs would win you must be out of your damn mind.They had better D better shooters a deeper bench and the greatest.I know everyone here loves the Spurs but be realistic they might win one game.

One game? So, what you're saying is the Spurs are worse than the 97-98 Jazz and the 96 Sonics? Please.

[mavs>spurs2]

One game? So, what you're saying is the Spurs are worse than the 97-98 Jazz and the 96 Sonics? Please.

It's not out of the realm of possibility...

The Jazz had 2 HOFers, plus byron russel to keep manu in check.

Bruce would also be inneffective because he wouldn't be able to guard Stockton or Malone because of the positions.

[L.I.T]

It's not out of the realm of possibility...

The Jazz had 2 HOFers, plus byron russel to keep manu in check.

Bruce would also be inneffective because he wouldn't be able to guard Stockton or Malone because of the positions.

Malone maybe a HOF, but Duncan is a superior player on both ends of the floor; and outside of his free-throw shooting (which in the clutch, Duncan might be superior) Duncan is the more versatile offensive player.

The second option on both of those teams was Jeff Hornacek, a shifty shooter but someone who would have suffered under the defense of Bowen. And do not discount the ability of Parker/Bowen to guard Stockton. Stockton was a tough, great and intelligent player but he would have had difficulty handling Parker on the defensive side.

The championship Spurs (which ever iteration you take) are deeper, more versatile and "clutcher" than the two WC champion Jazz teams. I would even hazard to say that the Spurs are better coached.

[The Franchise]

I understand how you feel. As i said i like the Spurs and hated the hell out of chicago, but i also watched both teams play. As much as i loath the Bulls i am still forced to be realistic about the situation. THE SPURS MIGHT WIN ONE GAME.

[barbacoataco]

The Bulls were a great team, but they lost games to teams that were not as good as the Spurs. Spurs fans have no confidence in their team. What about Tim Duncan? What about Ron Harper trying to run up and down the court with Tony Parker, who's about 10x faster. The Spurs defense uses rotations that NO TEAM used in the era of Jordan used. Look at the way they scrubbed Lebron in the Finals.
I'm surprised that Spurs fans buy into the media image that the Spurs are not a "real" dynasty, and that they couln't compete with great teams of the past. I actually think the 2004 Pistons would have beat some of the "great" teams of the past.

[barbacoataco]

in EVERY sport that can be measured objectively, like track & field, swimming, cycling, etc. --- the athletes of today are better than in the past. Every 5 years their is a new standard of competition. How would Steffi Graff do against Serena or Venus?

Now basketball is becoming like baseball where people believe that players in the past were much better than today. Babe Ruth with his beer belly was a better player than A-Rod. And the showtine Lakers would wipe the floor with any current team. That might be true in fan's imaginations, but the truth is that today's athletes are bigger, faster, and stronger than in the past, even 10 years ago.

[smrattler]

Which Bulls team exactly?

It doesn't matter, you kidding me? The "Least"ern Conference sucks!! The WCF is the real NBA Finals.

Besides, everyone knows King James is this era's MJ. He couldn't get a single win. No way the Bulls win.

[2centsworth]

It's not out of the realm of possibility...

The Jazz had 2 HOFers, plus byron russel to keep manu in check.

Bruce would also be inneffective because he wouldn't be able to guard Stockton or Malone because of the positions.
don't be so dumb. If the spurs could handle Snaq, Kobe and Horry they certainly could handle Stockton and Malone.

[smrattler]

It's not out of the realm of possibility...

The Jazz had 2 HOFers, plus byron russel to keep manu in check.

Bruce would also be inneffective because he wouldn't be able to guard Stockton or Malone because of the positions.


First, Stockton versus TP would be FUN to watch on both ends.

But let's get real... Byron Russel was a nice player, solid, but Manu at his best? Please.

And has everyone but me forgotten that TD torched Malone and the Jazz after that first month in his rookie year? And that was ROOKIE TD!

See here:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h.cgi?req=1&playoffs=E&p1=duncati01&p2=malonka01

[barbacoataco]

You guys are seriously forgetting about Tim Duncan in this entire discussion.

[mardigan]

You guys are seriously forgetting that I think the Spurs could beat the US basketball team

[barbacoataco]

I see you understand my argument.

[The Franchise]

Saying the NBA talent today is better than in Jordans era is not true. they actually dumbed the game down because today players are fundamental flawed. They took out the handcheck rule to make it easier on shooters. They put the little line underneath the basket to make it easier for post players to score. In Jordans time unless you were a real trooper it was wise to stay out of the paint. If you got in a fight you would be ejected but you might be playing the next game. Today it's the kinder gentler NBA.

[barbacoataco]

In Jordan's era he enjoyed a considerable size and speed advantage most nights. Today all the wings are 6-7 and athletic. The fact that there is more talent than in the past makes it harder for individual players to dominate. The NBA is so much more athletic today, and people argue that slower, smaller players from the past who shot a higher % jump shots were better. If that is true why doesn't a team field some of those players and see how they do. Look at how many college players like Brian Cardinal get run off the court in the NBA. Fact is- today's athletes are bigger, faster and stronger than in the past. That is an objective fact.

[monosylab1k]

In Jordan's era he enjoyed a considerable size and speed advantage most nights. Today all the wings are 6-7 and athletic. The fact that there is more talent than in the past makes it harder for individual players to dominate. The NBA is so much more athletic today, and people argue that slower, smaller players from the past who shot a higher % jump shots were better. If that is true why doesn't a team field some of those players and see how they do. Look at how many college players like Brian Cardinal get run off the court in the NBA. Fact is- today's athletes are bigger, faster and stronger than in the past. That is an objective fact.
I like this guy - he's funny.

[L.I.T]

Saying the NBA talent today is better than in Jordans era is not true. they actually dumbed the game down because today players are fundamental flawed. They took out the handcheck rule to make it easier on shooters. They put the little line underneath the basket to make it easier for post players to score. In Jordans time unless you were a real trooper it was wise to stay out of the paint. If you got in a fight you would be ejected but you might be playing the next game. Today it's the kinder gentler NBA.

"fundamental flawed". Please note that most analysts say the Spurs are one of the most fundamentally sound teams of all time. They are rarely out of position and don't rely on over-whelming athleticism but skill and team play and execution to grind their opponents down.

In Jordan's time? You're referring to the late 80's and early 90's then? Rules have changed since then. But the Spurs of 99 played under the 'old' rules and ran rampant through the playoffs.

Like I said any championship iteration of the Spurs is superior to the Jazz and Sonic teams that the Bulls faced in their last three-peat. So, again I ask you, do you really think the Spurs are worse than those teams?

[The Franchise]

I will give a more recent example. When grandpa Jordan at 39 years old was in Washington he was much slower, out of shape, and had broken his finger on his shooting hand that summer.With all that he still averaged 23 points on 49% shooting. AT 39!!!!!! Now who was he playing against?

[mardigan]

That Sonics team was really, really good
And that Jazz team had 2 top 50 players of all time, I dont know if I would say either team were slouches

[Oh, Gee!!]

Bulls=Best Championship Team Evah. End of thread.

[L.I.T]

I will give a more recent example. When grandpa Jordan at 39 years old was in Washington he was much slower, out of shape, and had broken his finger on his shooting hand that summer.With all that he still averaged 23 points on 49% shooting. AT 39!!!!!! Now who was he playing against?

Oh ok, so the GOAT of all time was still a decent player. Gotcha.

Hey look over here I'm going to break this down for you. You said the Spurs couldn't win more than one game against the Bulls. I called bullshit and said the Spurs are better than the Jazz in the last three-peats; teams that took 2 games each off the Bulls in the finals. I never said that the Spurs could beat the Bulls. I don't think the Spurs could beat the Bulls of the first three-peat. They might have had a shot at the 98 team though. The problem for the Spurs is that the defense the Spurs play has trouble with the triangle; that and the Bulls had excellent mid-range shooters.

Oh by the way, Jordan averaged 22.9 pts on 41.6% at 38 and 20 pts on 44.5% at 39...and didn't get out of the first round in the East.

[SilverPlayer]

That Sonics team was really, really good

It was good, but they couldn't hold a candle to the Spurs, seriously.
Duncan >>>Kemp Kemp would cause Duncan some trouble but hey so does Amare

We already know that TP>Payton
Even if Payton was aging at the time; TP hadn't even started to get as good as he is, when he wiped the floor with Payton.

And I'd take Manu and Bowen over Detlef Schrempf, Hersey Hawkins, and Nate McMillan

[Oh, Gee!!]

so now the silly argument has turned to whether the spurs would have been beaten as badly as the Sonics. What a pointless thread.

[mardigan]

It was good, but they couldn't hold a candle to the Spurs, seriously.
Duncan >>>Kemp Kemp would cause Duncan some trouble but hey so does Amare

We already know that TP>Payton
Even if Payton was aging at the time; TP hadn't even started to get as good as he is, when he wiped the floor with Payton.

And I'd take Manu and Bowen over Detlef Schrempf, Hersey Hawkins, and Nate McMillan
Thats not a given, and the stats would say that GP>Parker at that time in Paytons career. He was also maybe the best defensive point guard ever, so I dont know if I would say that. They also had Sam Perkins, who wasnt a scrub

[The Franchise]

Ok L.I.T. you caught me on my bullshit stats :) but my point was he was still outplaying most of the so called superstars of today WAY beyond his prime. The reason was because of the difference i mentioned earlier. Knowledge of the game.

[SilverPlayer]

Thats not a given, and the stats would say that GP>Parker at that time in Paytons career. He was also maybe the best defensive point guard ever, so I dont know if I would say that. They also had Sam Perkins, who wasnt a scrub


Uh huh Payton the best defensive guard couldn't handle the rookie Parker in his first playoffs. Payton hadn't fallen off his skills at that point, and couldn't handle what Parker brought.

The same can be extended to Harper or Jordan trying to guard Parker. Parker is literally unstoppable at times. And he is the best finisher at his position in the paint ever. People here need to recognizer that while Parker doesn't lead his own team in San Antonio, he is more than capable of it.

That's not even bringing Duncan into the equation.

This Spurs team is something special, and I think if Uduoka is capable of what I think he is capable of, next years teams will be their best ever.

[mardigan]

Uh huh Payton the best defensive guard couldn't handle the rookie Parker in his first playoffs. Payton hadn't fallen off his skills at that point, and couldn't handle what Parker brought.

The same can be extended to Harper or Jordan trying to guard Parker. Parker is literally unstoppable at times. And he is the best finisher at his position in the paint ever. People here need to recognizer that while Parker doesn't lead his own team in San Antonio, he is more than capable of it.

That's not even bringing Duncan into the equation.

This Spurs team is something special, and I think if Uduoka is capable of what I think he is capable of, next years teams will be their best ever.
Im not discounting Parker, your discounting Payton.
01-02 playoffs are the playoffs your talking about right.
Parker-15 points, 4 assists, 3 rebounds
Payton-22 points, 9 rebounds, 6 assists
And Payton was like 34 at the time guarding what, like a 19 year old?
Seems like Payton did just fine
And I was talking about the Finals Payton, who was like 28, way to try and steer your argument away from that and still lose.
Im a Spurs homer, but I dont discount what other players did and were just because they didnt suit up for the silver and black

[my2sons]

their defense was better because with the exception of Jordan, you could handcheck alot more, grab double dribble even more than now. I would say that it would depend on which rules the nba would follow and if dennis felt like playing defense or not. I think manu & tony would have big games and tim would orchestrate the team as usual. If the spurs weren't allowed to breath on jordan then the bulls would have the edge.

[The Franchise]

I have another overlooked aspect of that seattle team i'd like to mention. Before Shawn Kemp started f@#king up his career did you realize he was Duncans equal? Before you spout some Biased opinion go check out some reignman highlights from 92 to 98.

[mardigan]

I have another overlooked aspect of that seattle team i'd like to mention. Before Shawn Kemp started f@#king up his career did you realize he was Duncans equal? Before you spout some Biased opinion go check out some reignman highlights from 92 to 98.
Highlights are nice, but he was no where near the player Duncan was on both sides of the floor, its not even close.
Kemp
Most points per season-20
Most rebounds-11
Most blocks-2

Timmy
Points-26
Boards-13
Blocks-3
Kemp also only averaged over 2 assists once in his career, while Tim has averaged at least 3 every year of his career except one

Again, he was a great dunker, but he was never even close to Tim

[Mitch Cumsteen]

The defensive rules have changed so much since then -- not only the handchecking rule, but also the illegal defense rules -- that it's really hard to make an apples to apples comparison with regard to matchups and styles.

A couple of points, though:
1. The comparisons to the Jazz and the Sonics are laughable. Cite all the stats you want about Payton, Kemp, Malone and Stockton... but they were all ultimately losers and chokers who couldn't get the job done. That fact alone sets the Spurs apart from any of these pretenders, regardless of the fact that they had to get through MJ to get their ring. At the end of the day, you can't argue with the scoreboard and none of those guys ever won a ring.

2. The one thing I can't get past is Jordan's will to win. The Spurs, as great as they are, never have had the invincibility that the Bulls had, and it's all because of Jordan's freakish competitiveness and will to win. To me, that kind of trumps all of this discussion and tips the scales to the Bulls. I think the Spurs would take them to 6 or 7 games, but I can't see Jordan losing in the end.

3. Dennis Rodman (or any other post player on the Bulls 6 championship teams) would've been used and abused by Tim Duncan. Anybody who thinks that this matchup is anything but a complete and utter landslide in favor of the Spurs is off their rocker.

[mardigan]

The defensive rules have changed so much since then -- not only the handchecking rule, but also the illegal defense rules -- that it's really hard to make an apples to apples comparison with regard to matchups and styles.

A couple of points, though:
1. The comparisons to the Jazz and the Sonics are laughable. Cite all the stats you want about Payton, Kemp, Malone and Stockton... but they were all ultimately losers and chokers who couldn't get the job done. That fact alone sets the Spurs apart from any of these pretenders, regardless of the fact that they had to get through MJ to get their ring. At the end of the day, you can't argue with the scoreboard and none of those guys ever won a ring.

2. The one thing I can't get past is Jordan's will to win. The Spurs, as great as they are, never have had the invincibility that the Bulls had, and it's all because of Jordan's freakish competitiveness and will to win. To me, that kind of trumps all of this discussion and tips the scales to the Bulls. I think the Spurs would take them to 6 or 7 games, but I can't see Jordan losing in the end.

3. Dennis Rodman (or any other post player on the Bulls 6 championship teams) would've been used and abused by Tim Duncan. Anybody who thinks that this matchup is anything but a complete and utter landslide in favor of the Spurs is off their rocker.
So you call the Jazz and Sonics teams losers for losing to the Bulls, then state that the SPurs would have lost to the Bulls.
Good point

And Payton does actually have a ring

[mardigan]

Another point, say all you want about those Jazz and Sonics teams, but you dont think those teams could have gotten past the Cavs, Nets, or Knicks?
Hell, I would argue that they could have gotten past the Pistons as well.

[The Franchise]

Highlights are nice, but he was no where near the player Duncan was on both sides of the floor, its not even close.
Most points per season-20
Most rebounds-11
Most blocks-2
Again, he was a great dunker, but he was never even close to TimActually http://www.nba.com/playerfile/shawn_kemp/career_stats.html

[mardigan]

Actually http://www.nba.com/playerfile/shawn_kemp/career_stats.html
Actually what?
Unless you average the 20.5 up to 21, so ok, most points in a season 21, you got me
Aww, dont tell me you were looking at the playoff averages?

[The Franchise]

Actually what?
Unless you average the 20.5 up to 21, so ok, most points in a season 21, you got me
Aww, dont tell me you were looking at the playoff averages?
Actually i was. :oops My bad. :lol

[bobbyjoe]

don't be so dumb. If the spurs could handle Snaq, Kobe and Horry they certainly could handle Stockton and Malone.

The Spurs didnt "handle" Shaq, Kobe, and Horry.

From the time Phil Jackson became coach of the Lakers in 2000 and the Lakers begain their mini dynasty to the time the team was broken up in 2005, the Spurs faced the Lakers in the playoffs 4 times.

Here were the results:

LA won 14 of the 21 playoff games and 3 of the 4 playoff series.

How the hell is that "handling" LA?

They lost to LA a lot more than they beat them. Beating someone once in 4 tries doesnt give you the right to say you had their number or got the best of them.

[bobbyjoe]

Another point, say all you want about those Jazz and Sonics teams, but you dont think those teams could have gotten past the Cavs, Nets, or Knicks?
Hell, I would argue that they could have gotten past the Pistons as well.

If the late 90's Jazz were in today's NBA they would be at worst the 2nd best team in the league (them and SA fighting it out for #1).

Those Jazz teams were pretty damn good, they gave the Bulls the best run for their money of any teams the Bulls ever faced.

They'd have clobbered teams like the Cavs, Nets, and Knicks as you mention.

Hell, the Jazz of 2006 who were nothing compared to the old school Jazz were able to get to the WCF in today's diluted NBA.

[Dirk Nowitzki]

The Spurs didnt "handle" Shaq, Kobe, and Horry.

From the time Phil Jackson became coach of the Lakers in 2000 and the Lakers begain their mini dynasty to the time the team was broken up in 2005, the Spurs faced the Lakers in the playoffs 4 times.

Here were the results:

LA won 14 of the 21 playoff games and 3 of the 4 playoff series.

How the hell is that "handling" LA?

They lost to LA a lot more than they beat them. Beating someone once in 4 tries doesnt give you the right to say you had their number or got the best of them.

It was very unfortunate the Spurs didnt have Jackson or Claxton for 2004. Losing those guys literally hurt the Spurs in 04. They would have raped the living shit out of LA had they of kept that 03 team in tact and not trying to land Jason Kidd. Hell that 2003 team should of finished the Lakers with very little trouble in 5 games if they didnt give game 4 away.

[ThePrivateSpur]

Bulls=Best Championship Team Evah. End of thread.

true dat!

[stretch]

The Bulls were a great team, but they lost games to teams that were not as good as the Spurs.

Thats the stupidest thing i've ever heard. I guess the Spurs greatness should be called in question because they lost to the fuckin Bobcats.

[stretch]

I will give a more recent example. When grandpa Jordan at 39 years old was in Washington he was much slower, out of shape, and had broken his finger on his shooting hand that summer.With all that he still averaged 23 points on 49% shooting. AT 39!!!!!! Now who was he playing against?
Don't forget his 50 point game either.

[stretch]

Oh ok, so the GOAT of all time was still a decent player.

:wtf

"The Greatest Of All Time of all time"?

[Mitch Cumsteen]

So you call the Jazz and Sonics teams losers for losing to the Bulls, then state that the SPurs would have lost to the Bulls.
Good point

And Payton does actually have a ring
The difference is that MAYBE the Spurs would have lost to the Bulls IN MY OPINION. But MAYBE not. However, it is a fact that all of those other players were a bunch of chokers and losers who never won a ring. With, of course, the exception of Gary Payton who (as you point out) actually has a ring, just like Beno Udrih. Beno and GP are clearly both great champions.

[stretch]

We already know that TP>Payton

ARE YOU KIDDING ME???

:lmao

[stretch]

Uh huh Payton the best defensive guard couldn't handle the rookie Parker in his first playoffs.

Daniel Gibson lit Chauncey Billups up in his first playoff outing. Are you saying that Daniel Gibson > Chauncey Billups?

[mardigan]

The Spurs lost in 97/98 to the Malone and Stockton Jazz in 5 games with Robinson and Duncan, which was conveniently not brought up

[stretch]

The Spurs lost in 97/98 to the Malone and Stockton Jazz in 5 games with Robinson and Duncan, which was conveniently not brought up
Interesting.

BTW- I deleted that post that you quoted because I didn't see someone else already beat me to making the same kind of reply.

[mardigan]

The difference is that MAYBE the Spurs would have lost to the Bulls IN MY OPINION. But MAYBE not. However, it is a fact that all of those other players were a bunch of chokers and losers who never won a ring. With, of course, the exception of Gary Payton who (as you point out) actually has a ring, just like Beno Udrih. Beno and GP are clearly both great champions.
At least GP averaged 24 minutes a game through their playoff run, and at least contributed. Beno never has contributed anything to any playoff run.
And yea, those other guys didnt win a ring, but its just as much of an opinion that they were chokers. Just because the Spurs have been the best in a weak league doesnt make the players on the second best team in a stacked league chokers.

[mardigan]

The difference is that MAYBE the Spurs would have lost to the Bulls IN MY OPINION. But MAYBE not. However, it is a fact that all of those other players were a bunch of chokers and losers who never won a ring. With, of course, the exception of Gary Payton who (as you point out) actually has a ring, just like Beno Udrih. Beno and GP are clearly both great champions.
So I guess David Robinson was a choker for being beat by chokers every year until he didnt have to carry the team?


And btw, Robinson averaged less minutes in the 03 title run than GP did in their Heat run.

[Obstructed_View]

No. Bill Cartwright is like 50.

[exstatic]

Bulls=Best Championship Team Evah. End of thread.
Ha hmmm

Sincerely
Bill Russell of the 11 rings.

[exstatic]

The Spurs lost in 97/98 to the Malone and Stockton Jazz in 5 games with Robinson and Duncan, which was conveniently not brought up
Well, Robinson, anyway. Tim injured his ankle and missed games 3-5 which you conveniently didn't bring up.

[SilverPlayer]

Daniel Gibson lit Chauncey Billups up in his first playoff outing. Are you saying that Daniel Gibson > Chauncey Billups?


Are you referring to a whole series or just a game? I see he scored 31, 11, 21, 9, 9 against him. The 31 point game I will give you, but 21 isn't lighting someone up.

The second part of my point was that Parker has since become a hell of a lot of a better player since he took GP to school. Gibson may have played his best game(s) against Billups, but Parker has since taken it to a level that GP would never even at his peak been able to stop.

GP was a hell of a player in his glove days, and he would have given Parker trouble with his offense, but defensively no one has been able to keep up with Parker. Ben Wallace's help defense and Shaq's size has intimidated him in the past. Starbery has given Parker the most trouble, but in the end Parker has proven he can overcome those players.

So yeah The Spurs over the Kemp Payton Sonics. And they would have been a very difficult series for the Bulls. I'd give the Spurs even odds against any of the Bulls teams.

Hell I think Shaq and the Kobe's Lakers could have beaten some of the weaker Bulls teams.

[mardigan]

Well, Robinson, anyway. Tim injured his ankle and missed games 3-5 which you conveniently didn't bring up.

1997/98: With the return of David Robinson and the addition of Tim Duncan the Spurs had one of the most formidable frontcourt duos in NBA history. Duncan would make his presence known immediately taking Rookie of the Year honors while leading all NBA players in double doubles with 57. A year after making the steepest decline in NBA history the Spurs made the biggest improvement finishing in 2nd Place with a solid 56-26 record. In the playoffs the Spurs would make easily knock off the Phoenix Suns in 4 games. In the 2nd Round the Spurs were matched up against the Utah Jazz. In the first 2 games in Utah Duncan was impressive, but the Spurs lost two heartbreakers. When the series returned to the Alamodome the Spurs won Game 3 despite Tim Duncan injuring his ankle. In the final 2 games Duncan played through pain but the Spurs chances were shot as they fell in 5 games.
http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/nba/sanantonio/spurs.html



Did I? Looks like the Spurs played 9 playoff games that year, and Tim started 9 games the same year, hmmm

[L.I.T]

:wtf

"The Greatest Of All Time of all time"?

:lol

If anyone could be the GOAT of all time, it would be Jordan.

[mavs>spurs2]

don't be so dumb. If the spurs could handle Snaq, Kobe and Horry they certainly could handle Stockton and Malone.

Don't be so naive. It's definately not out of the realm of possibility, but I would probably place my bet on the Spurs.

[mardigan]

Are you referring to a whole series or just a game? I see he scored 31, 11, 21, 9, 9 against him. The 31 point game I will give you, but 21 isn't lighting someone up.

The second part of my point was that Parker has since become a hell of a lot of a better player since he took GP to school. Gibson may have played his best game(s) against Billups, but Parker has since taken it to a level that GP would never even at his peak been able to stop.

GP was a hell of a player in his glove days, and he would have given Parker trouble with his offense, but defensively no one has been able to keep up with Parker. Ben Wallace's help defense and Shaq's size has intimidated him in the past. Starbery has given Parker the most trouble, but in the end Parker has proven he can overcome those players.
I understand that argument, but to write off GP d-ing up Parker is pretty unfair as GP never played against Tony in his prime. The guy could guard just about anyone, even doing about as good of a job on MJ as one could hope to do, so its not like Im throwing some crazy idea out there saying GP could guard Tony. GP put up numbers better than anything Tony has put up in his career so far (not saying he wont keep improving, I think he will), so you cant act like its some given that Tony is better than GP ever was.
And the part about Tony not being able to guard Tony is true as well, I remember even in his old age Tony couldnt handle Payton in the post.



And when did he take him to school, I hope its still not that same series you were talking about when GP put up far superior numbers than Tony in just about every area

[Oh, Gee!!]

Ha hmmm

Sincerely
Bill Russell of the 11 rings.

now there's a real debate

[mavs>spurs2]

Saying the NBA talent today is better than in Jordans era is not true. they actually dumbed the game down because today players are fundamental flawed. They took out the handcheck rule to make it easier on shooters. They put the little line underneath the basket to make it easier for post players to score. In Jordans time unless you were a real trooper it was wise to stay out of the paint. If you got in a fight you would be ejected but you might be playing the next game. Today it's the kinder gentler NBA.

I agree that the NBA game was much better as a whole back then. Where I disagree is where you say that there was more talent in Jordan's day. I think there is actually more talent in today's NBA, but with less fundamentals so in the end it evens out more or less. I actually preferred watching basketball back in the 90's as opposed to today and I also think that the 80s and early to mid 90s were the NBA's golden years.

That said, I can't see the spurs winning more than 2 games against Jordans bulls. If Jordan was unstoppable before the hand check rule, there would be no way in hell of slowing him down in today's NBA. And as good as the Spurs d is, as a league defense was on another level back in those days and teams were allowed to get much more physical. I'd also give the edge to the Bulls defensively for this reason. Not to take anything away from Bowen and Tim, but Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman>them defensively. And maybe it's not fair to judge since they played in a much more hard nosed league with different rules (hand checking for example) but this is all I have to go by.

[mavs>spurs2]

I understand that argument, but to write off GP d-ing up Parker is pretty unfair as GP never played against Tony in his prime. The guy could guard just about anyone, even doing about as good of a job on MJ as one could hope to do, so its not like Im throwing some crazy idea out there saying GP could guard Tony. GP put up numbers better than anything Tony has put up in his career so far (not saying he wont keep improving, I think he will), so you cant act like its some given that Tony is better than GP ever was.
And the part about Tony not being able to guard Tony is true as well, I remember even in his old age Tony couldnt handle Payton in the post.



And when did he take him to school, I hope its still not that same series you were talking about when GP put up far superior numbers than Tony in just about every area

I think Mardigan pretty much summed it up. Tony is still improving and may end up better than Payton was, but as of right now career wise the answer is no.

It's nice to have level headed guys like Mardigan, Elliottfan, etc around to balance out some of the retardedness displayed by some fans this offseason. It's a good thing to feel confident about your team, but there is a fine line between this and reality. I just about pissed my pants when I read some of the responses in the dream team vs spurs thread.

[mavs>spurs2]

Hell, on second thought, it's really likely that Parker will be THE #1 point guard in a few years. Kidd is already on the decline and Nash won't be able to hold up too much longer, maybe a few years at the very most. His only real competition is CP3 and Derron Williams.

[kingmalaki]

I don't see the current Spurs winning that one. Pippen, Harper and MJ could contain your wing players. Your only shot would be if Duncan could go into the Hakeem/Shaq mold where he was dropping 35 every night (similar to the 2006 semis against the Mavs, but Rodman is a big difference from Dirk/Dampier).

However. I do think the 99 team could do it. I think the twin towers would be too much for Chicago.

[kingmalaki]

The Bulls were a great team, but they lost games to teams that were not as good as the Spurs. Spurs fans have no confidence in their team. What about Tim Duncan? What about Ron Harper trying to run up and down the court with Tony Parker, who's about 10x faster. The Spurs defense uses rotations that NO TEAM used in the era of Jordan used. Look at the way they scrubbed Lebron in the Finals.
I'm surprised that Spurs fans buy into the media image that the Spurs are not a "real" dynasty, and that they couln't compete with great teams of the past. I actually think the 2004 Pistons would have beat some of the "great" teams of the past.

I think every squad Chicago beat in the Finals would be a contender in today’s league. The weakest team they beat is arguably the Sonics, and even they had an in-prime Kemp, Payton and tons of depth.

I don’t think Harper/Pippen (mainly Scottie) would have an issue with Tony Parker. They didn’t seem to have one with Magic, Marc Jackson, Payton, KJ, Penny (when he was a stud) or Stockton. Parker isn’t better than any of those guards.

If you think the Spurs play better defense then teams like the 80’s Pistons, 90’s Rockets, 90’s Sonics or 90’s Knicks I suggest you go watch some tapes. Those were some great defensive ballclubs.

LeBron doesn’t have a jumper…MJ does. Your defense in the Finals was built around giving him midrange shots that he couldn’t hit. Also, the Cavs are an offensively inept team. The Bulls used the triangle.

The Spurs are very much a real dynasty. I just think sometimes folks forget how good some of those losing teams in the 90's were because they didn't win championships. I think your best shot to beat those squads was the 99 team, where you still had 2 superstar players. Every title team in the 90's had 2 stars and depth (besides Houston). Every team in the 80's had 3 HOF type players, and depth. SA is great for their era, but I don't think the majority of the teams have the talent 1-12 to compete with those squads.

[kingmalaki]

In Jordan's era he enjoyed a considerable size and speed advantage most nights. Today all the wings are 6-7 and athletic. The fact that there is more talent than in the past makes it harder for individual players to dominate. The NBA is so much more athletic today, and people argue that slower, smaller players from the past who shot a higher % jump shots were better. If that is true why doesn't a team field some of those players and see how they do. Look at how many college players like Brian Cardinal get run off the court in the NBA. Fact is- today's athletes are bigger, faster and stronger than in the past. That is an objective fact.

First off, as a Spurs fan you should know that bigger and more athletic does not = better defender. Bowen is average height for his position and not all that athletic.

Secondly, this MJ didn’t face big, athletic defenders thing is a farce. He won all of his titles in the 90’s, when dudes like Plastic Man, Hill, Pippen, Sprewell were playing. Go look up the rosters from 90’s squads and you will see plenty of athletic wings. Plus in MJ’s time the game was more physical, you could handcheck, flagrant foul and fight without getting kicked out of games or suspended, etc. Perimiter players in today’s league have it easier than ever.

The sport hasn’t gone through some extreme evolution in 10 years…and MJ was still dropping 20 a game on 45% as a 40 yr old with no athleticism and only a jumper…..

[Cry Havoc]

I agree that the NBA game was much better as a whole back then. Where I disagree is where you say that there was more talent in Jordan's day. I think there is actually more talent in today's NBA, but with less fundamentals so in the end it evens out more or less. I actually preferred watching basketball back in the 90's as opposed to today and I also think that the 80s and early to mid 90s were the NBA's golden years.


Are you kidding me? Have you actually watched the defenses from the 80s? They gave up open 15 footers with regularity. Players could run off a pick and be wide open and have 5 seconds to set his shot. The entire defense would literally sag and watch the shot go up.

The 80s was an atrocious period of defense for the NBA. The 90s and 00s have defensive teams that would absolutely dominate the teams of that period (except for the truly great teams).

There is NO WAY you can call giving up open jumpers all over the place "good fundamentals." No way in hell. It's no wonder the mid-range shooting has fallen a bit -- players used to have 12 feet between them and the next closest defender.

[spursjustice]

Ha hmmm

Sincerely
Bill Russell of the 11 rings.

That's a dynasty...

[kingmalaki]

Are you kidding me? Have you actually watched the defenses from the 80s? They gave up open 15 footers with regularity. Players could run off a pick and be wide open and have 5 seconds to set his shot. The entire defense would literally sag and watch the shot go up.

The 80s was an atrocious period of defense for the NBA. The 90s and 00s have defensive teams that would absolutely dominate the teams of that period (except for the truly great teams).

There is NO WAY you can call giving up open jumpers all over the place "good fundamentals." No way in hell. It's no wonder the mid-range shooting has fallen a bit -- players used to have 12 feet between them and the next closest defender.

Jordan won all of his titles in the 90’s….

I agree that defense was not as much of an emphasis in the 80’s, but you can’t forget that teams in general executed much better offensively, ran a lot more and had dudes that could actually shoot. Now the argument is was that due to the execution, or the defense. The chicken or the egg……

[Cry Havoc]

Jordan won all of his titles in the 90’s….

I agree that defense was not as much of an emphasis in the 80’s, but you can’t forget that teams in general executed much better offensively, ran a lot more and had dudes that could actually shoot. Now the argument is was that due to the execution, or the defense. The chicken or the egg……

Um. Watching a player spot up for 4 seconds at the elbow without so much as lifting a hand....

Do you think ANYONE on the Spurs could do that without Pop screaming in their face for it?

Good execution does not account for lazy defense.

[kingmalaki]

Um. Watching a player spot up for 4 seconds at the elbow without so much as lifting a hand....

Do you think ANYONE on the Spurs could do that without Pop screaming in their face for it?

Good execution does not account for lazy defense.

I don't recall dudes being given 4 seconds to shoot. Either way, MJ won ALL of his titles in the 90's.....

[mavs>spurs2]

Are you kidding me? Have you actually watched the defenses from the 80s? They gave up open 15 footers with regularity. Players could run off a pick and be wide open and have 5 seconds to set his shot. The entire defense would literally sag and watch the shot go up.

The 80s was an atrocious period of defense for the NBA. The 90s and 00s have defensive teams that would absolutely dominate the teams of that period (except for the truly great teams).

There is NO WAY you can call giving up open jumpers all over the place "good fundamentals." No way in hell. It's no wonder the mid-range shooting has fallen a bit -- players used to have 12 feet between them and the next closest defender.

I was referring to the late 80s and 90's, dont forget about the bad boy piston teams.

The reason I include the 80s in the golden years was because of Magic, Bird, and all the high scoring. The defense didn't come around untill the very end of the 80s and throughout the 90s.

[Mitch Cumsteen]

So I guess David Robinson was a choker for being beat by chokers every year until he didnt have to carry the team?


And btw, Robinson averaged less minutes in the 03 title run than GP did in their Heat run.
Yes, David Robinson was a choker. That may be blasphemous here, but it is the truth. That was the general perception of him pre-Duncan: Robinson wasn't good enough to get his team over the hump and win a ring on his own.

And say what you will about 03, when Robinson's back was going out and he barely played.... but he was still a superstar on the 1999 champions. GP never came close to that with the Heat. And at least Robinson had the decency to retire after his final ring. Look at Payton. He chased a ring in LA and then did the same thing in Miami. And he still stuck around afterward. Hell, he still won't retire even after Pat Riley said he didn't want him back.

[SilverPlayer]

Yes, David Robinson was a choker. That may be blasphemous here, but it is the truth. That was the general perception of him pre-Duncan: Robinson wasn't good enough to get his team over the hump and win a ring on his own.

And say what you will about 03, when Robinson's back was going out and he barely played.... but he was still a superstar on the 1999 champions. GP never came close to that with the Heat. And at least Robinson had the decency to retire after his final ring. Look at Payton. He chased a ring in LA and then did the same thing in Miami. And he still stuck around afterward. Hell, he still won't retire even after Pat Riley said he didn't want him back.


Yes Robinson choked :lol :lol It was his fault he had Vinny Del Negro, and JR Reid as his supporting cast.

Elliot was the closest thing he ever had to a second wheel, and Elliot while special was not a second superstar.

[mardigan]

Yes Robinson choked :lol :lol It was his fault he had Vinny Del Negro, and JR Reid as his supporting cast.

Elliot was the closest thing he ever had to a second wheel, and Elliot while special was not a second superstar.
Some people just want to throw the word choker out there, even if said player has given everything he could to get his team to the promised land. Sometimes the stars dont align for everyone, doesnt mean that the players are chokers. Reggie Miller was one of the most clutch players Ive ever seen, he just ran into better teams.

[Pistol...2K4]

I know 80% of you are spurs fans but I want to know the truth from you guys and not answers based on your team favorite.

Which team is better Michael Jordan's Bulls or The current San Antonio Spurs


MJ was one of the few athletes who not only lived up to the hype , but surpassed it with his play. I don't think any team will match up to the 96 Bulls for awhile , but the 93 team and the 98 team would be a good match-up against our 2005 squad....still think MJ would have figured out a way to beat us though.

[mavs>spurs2]

Mitch you are just wrong here, plain and simple. Not every player is a choker just because they don't win it all. Sometimes luck just doesn't fall your way and you run into better teams. Like Mardigan said, Reggie was clutch but just never had the right team to go all the way. Stockton and Malone weren't chokers, but always ran into MJ's Bulls. Shit happens

[ashrafabdeljaber]

Ok guys let me sort everything out. The problem with you spurs fans (no disrespect to the team) is you guys seem to pick spurs over the bulls just because you're a spurs fan. You don't base it on evidence.

Here's evidence why bulls are better than the spurs.

On my other post, I wanted to see from you guys which San antonio spurs team was the best. Most of you guys said the 1999 team was the best. The roster on the 1999 team was the same roster on the 1998 team. During the 1998 season, the bulls (the old, done with their prime) bulls swept the spurs in the season that year.

[da_suns_fan__]

LMAO at this thread.

The Spurs are coming off the most tainted championship in NBA history and you want to compare them to Jordan's Bulls? :lol

They aren't even the best team in the league NOW. Third, at best, and slipping!

[SpursDynasty]

I think that depends....

Would the officials let a push off at the crucial closing moments of a game go by or would they call a foul when it's supposed to be called, superstar or not?

[da_suns_fan__]

I think that depends....

Would the officials let a push off at the crucial closing moments of a game go by or would they call a foul when it's supposed to be called, superstar or not?


Would Stern suspend Pippen and Kukoc?

[SpursDynasty]

Would Stern suspend Pippen and Kukoc?

If they came off the bench during an altercation.

But that's the difference, these guys at full strength (The Bulls) would win the championship. Can't say the same about Phoenix at full strength.

[SpursDynasty]

Let me go ahead and say that the Bulls would beat the Spurs.

But it's hard to compare eras. There wasn't a Jordan-caliber player before the Jordan era, and there wasn't one after....

All I know is, the Spurs have won four championships in the nine seasons since the current NBA era began. No other team has won that many in the same time span. Nor does any other team hold the highest winning percentage in all pro sports since then.

[mavs>spurs2]

I think that depends....

Would the officials let a push off at the crucial closing moments of a game go by or would they call a foul when it's supposed to be called, superstar or not?

He pushed off because Byron Russel was all over him. They were allowed to play rough back then and that's just how it goes. That foul wouldn't have been called regardless whether it was the regular season or game 7 of the finals.

[ashrafabdeljaber]

Why are you guys talking about different eras. As I said the 1999 spurs that won the title that year got swept in the season by Chicago the previous year (The roster in 1999 was also the same in 1998)

[TDMVPDPOY]

robinsons spurs fare well with the bull encounters in the regular seasons...i see no difference

[ashrafabdeljaber]

LOL it's a dream come true if my site had arguments like these

[baseline bum]

Jordan's Bulls had seasons of 72, 69, and 67 wins. They have the two greatest seasons in league history for crying out loud.

[Booharv]

I call bullshit on that. Beast, Iceman, and Storm would be useless. Wolvey would puncture the ball, and Jean would go Phoenix and kill them all.

You think Mighty Mouse could beat up Superman? I saw him on television the other day, he was holding five elephants in one hand.

[Cry Havoc]

You think Mighty Mouse could beat up Superman? I saw him on television the other day, he was holding five elephants in one hand.

http://www.sound-of-rain.de/sor/bilder/covers/Disciple-My%20Daddy%20Can%20Whip%20Your%20Daddy.jpg

[barbacoataco]

The 1998 Spurs were not at all the same team as 1999.

[dbreiden83080]

It would be a good series. Jordan never faced a great post guy like Tim at his best. I think the 99 team would have beat the Bulls had Jordan come back for one more year no doubt about it, Spurs would have ended their dynasty.

[Mister Sinister]

You think Mighty Mouse could beat up Superman? I saw him on television the other day, he was holding five elephants in one hand.
Anyone could beat Supes. He's a godmoding, idealistic, sissy. Batman>Superman. End of fucking story.

[dbreiden83080]

. If you put up the '07 Spurs team, I'd say we beat the last two, but lose to the other four Bulls squads.

I agree although i have my doubts about those other teams as well since they all relied on MJ for so much offense but the last 2 teams, yeah Spurs would take them.

[dbreiden83080]

Anyone could beat Supes. He's a godmoding, idealistic, sissy. Batman>Superman. End of fucking story.

Man of Steel kicks the shit out of The Dark Knight any day of the week and twice on Sunday. :p:

[Mister Sinister]

Man of Steel kicks the shit out of The Dark Knight any day of the week and twice on Sunday. :p:
Ever read Dark Knight Returns? Let that be a lesson to you.

[dbreiden83080]

Ever read Dark Knight Returns? Let that be a lesson to you.

Ever see Batman and Robin, lesson OVER!!!

[mardigan]

Why are you guys talking about different eras. As I said the 1999 spurs that won the title that year got swept in the season by Chicago the previous year (The roster in 1999 was also the same in 1998)
:lol
Thats your argument?
The Spurs lost both games in the regular season to the Cavs this last year
Nice input though

[kingmalaki]

Yes Robinson choked :lol :lol It was his fault he had Vinny Del Negro, and JR Reid as his supporting cast.

Elliot was the closest thing he ever had to a second wheel, and Elliot while special was not a second superstar.

You are not a choker for losing but in the way you lose. Robinsons teammates have nothing to do with the decrease in his production in some key playoff losses, or every big moment pre-Duncnan.

[kingmalaki]

It would be a good series. Jordan never faced a great post guy like Tim at his best. I think the 99 team would have beat the Bulls had Jordan come back for one more year no doubt about it, Spurs would have ended their dynasty.

Um, they swept Shaq and Orlando in 96. Shaq put up 27, 11, 3 and 2 that year, and 26, 10 and 5 in the playoffs (on 61% shooting at that).

[GrandeDavid]

Spurs in seven.

[SilverPlayer]

You are not a choker for losing but in the way you lose. Robinsons teammates have nothing to do with the decrease in his production in some key playoff losses, or every big moment pre-Duncnan.


Um Robinson's crappy teammates have everything to do with the fact that every team was able to triple team David Robinson with impunity. The Spurs best (and only) three point shooters were Sean Elliot and Chuck Person. The fact that Robinson was forced to single cover Hakeem while he was being triple teamed is so often overlooked by myopic fans that it is becoming a cliche.

The fact that Robinson's totals never declined significantly is only a testament to just how great he was.

Or did you forget it takes 5 players to win the ring?

[TheAuthority]

It's really impossible to say, but I think it would be a very good and close series. Duncan would torch them inside. They have nobody that can guard him. Bowen is capable of guarding Jordan and Manu is capable of guarding Pippen. I think the Bulls would probably win, but it could go either way.

[kingmalaki]

Um Robinson's crappy teammates have everything to do with the fact that every team was able to triple team David Robinson with impunity. The Spurs best (and only) three point shooters were Sean Elliot and Chuck Person. The fact that Robinson was forced to single cover Hakeem while he was being triple teamed is so often overlooked by myopic fans that it is becoming a cliche.

The fact that Robinson's totals never declined significantly is only a testament to just how great he was.

Or did you forget it takes 5 players to win the ring?

Was Robinson the only player to be tripled without impunity? The same happened to Hakeem, MJ and countless others before they got help, and they put up steller production in defeat. I am not blaming Robinson for losing (the best team wins), but you don't have to play like garbage in a loss.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

I wonder what ChumpDumper has to say about all this...

[mavs>spurs2]

It's really impossible to say, but I think it would be a very good and close series. Duncan would torch them inside. They have nobody that can guard him. Bowen is capable of guarding Jordan and Manu is capable of guarding Pippen. I think the Bulls would probably win, but it could go either way.

Bowen capable of guarding Jordan????? :lmao :lmao :lmao

Manu capable of guarding Pippen???? :lmao :lmao

I think you're forgetting Rodman was a great defensive player and could do some damage to Duncan's numbers.

[ATXSPUR]

The Bulls were a great team, but they lost games to teams that were not as good as the Spurs. Spurs fans have no confidence in their team. What about Tim Duncan? What about Ron Harper trying to run up and down the court with Tony Parker, who's about 10x faster. The Spurs defense uses rotations that NO TEAM used in the era of Jordan used. Look at the way they scrubbed Lebron in the Finals.
I'm surprised that Spurs fans buy into the media image that the Spurs are not a "real" dynasty, and that they couln't compete with great teams of the past. I actually think the 2004 Pistons would have beat some of the "great" teams of the past.

The 2004 pistons were fucking bad asses. I am still shocked at this shell of a pistons team we saw lose to cleveland.

[Cry Havoc]

Was Robinson the only player to be tripled without impunity? The same happened to Hakeem, MJ and countless others before they got help, and they put up steller production in defeat. I am not blaming Robinson for losing (the best team wins), but you don't have to play like garbage in a loss.

Tell us, how did Hakeem do in the non-title years? :lol


I think you're forgetting Rodman was a great defensive player and could do some damage to Duncan's numbers.

That's rich. Duncan would have the worm in foul/technical trouble by the mid-point of the 2nd quarter. If they single covered Duncan, he would absolutely torch Rodman.

[magic]

Bulls=Best Championship Team Evah. End of thread.

:nope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwlhcnoljnM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-G_DtQq2Qo

THE SHOWTIME ROSTER

Earvin "Magic" Johnson (1979-1991, 1996)
Byron Scott (1983-1993)
Michael Cooper (1978-1990)
James Worthy (1982-1994)
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (1969-1989)
Norm Nixon (1977-1983)
Bob McAdoo (1981-1985)
Kurt Rambis (1981-1988)
Jamaal "Silk" Wilkes (1977-1985)

[Roxsfan]

The 2004 pistons were fucking bad asses. I am still shocked at this shell of a pistons team we saw lose to cleveland.

Me too, and then Cleveland did such a poor job rep'ing the east.

[Indazone]

It's really impossible to say, but I think it would be a very good and close series. Duncan would torch them inside. They have nobody that can guard him. Bowen is capable of guarding Jordan and Manu is capable of guarding Pippen. I think the Bulls would probably win, but it could go either way.

Oh for crying out loud. You are talking about a Dynasty here. The best player the NBA has ever had in Air Jordan. Bowen couldn't stop him and nobody could stop him. You're talking about a team that has won 5 championships. The most dominate NBA team in history. The Spurs would get their nuts roasted by the Bulls. No forget roasted...they would get scorched. Duncan would get his points but as for the rest of the positions? Forget it.

[Fast Dunk]

These idiots are really DUMB and delusional!!!!

[Fast Dunk]

:nope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwlhcnoljnM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-G_DtQq2Qo

THE SHOWTIME ROSTER

Earvin "Magic" Johnson (1979-1991, 1996)
Byron Scott (1983-1993)
Michael Cooper (1978-1990)
James Worthy (1982-1994)
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (1969-1989)
Norm Nixon (1977-1983)
Bob McAdoo (1981-1985)
Kurt Rambis (1981-1988)
Jamaal "Silk" Wilkes (1977-1985)

Faker!

[TheAuthority]

:nope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwlhcnoljnM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-G_DtQq2Qo

THE SHOWTIME ROSTER

Earvin "Magic" Johnson (1979-1991, 1996)
Byron Scott (1983-1993)
Michael Cooper (1978-1990)
James Worthy (1982-1994)
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (1969-1989)
Norm Nixon (1977-1983)
Bob McAdoo (1981-1985)
Kurt Rambis (1981-1988)
Jamaal "Silk" Wilkes (1977-1985)


Jordan/Pippen >> Kareem/Magic

[TheAuthority]

Oh for crying out loud. You are talking about a Dynasty here. The best player the NBA has ever had in Air Jordan. Bowen couldn't stop him and nobody could stop him. You're talking about a team that has won 5 championships. The most dominate NBA team in history. The Spurs would get their nuts roasted by the Bulls. No forget roasted...they would get scorched. Duncan would get his points but as for the rest of the positions? Forget it.

Really? Who's guarding Parker? And if you say Pippen, he already torched a similar player in Marion. They would have no answers for Parker or Duncan. The Bulls have also never played a defense like the Spurs. And if you say the Pistons, that's horse shit.

[TheAuthority]

Bowen capable of guarding Jordan????? :lmao :lmao :lmao

Manu capable of guarding Pippen???? :lmao :lmao

I think you're forgetting Rodman was a great defensive player and could do some damage to Duncan's numbers.

When's the last time Pippen brought a team on his back and brought home a gold medal? Never. I'm not saying Manu > Pippen, but let's not act like this is some huge one-sided matchup in the Bulls favor that they would exploit over and over, because it just isn't.

When's the last time Jordan had a player like Bowen guard him, with a player like Duncan helping? Never. John Starks/Patrick Ewing doesn't exactly = Duncan/Bowen.

Yeah, Rodman would do a great job of guarding him, until the 2nd quarter arrived and he had 4 fouls on him because of his lack of size and strength.

[anakha]

Yeah, Rodman would do a great job of guarding him, until the 2nd quarter arrived and he had 4 fouls on him because of his lack of size and strength.

I'm as big a Timmy fan as anyone, but I really think he'd have problems with Rodman.

I remember watching the 96 Bulls-Magic series and Rodman was giving Shaq fits when matched up against him, despite giving up 6 inches and about a hundred pounds. And he did it with a combination of Vlade Divac-like flopping, quick hands to disrupt Shaq's dribble, and just plain getting in Shaq's head.

Rodman was a very smart and very underrated post defender, and while he got his fair share of technical-fueled ejections, he really didn't foul out of a game (the usual way) that much.

96-98 Rodman against Timmy? I'd pay good money to see that matchup again. :hungry:

[TheAuthority]

I'm as big a Timmy fan as anyone, but I really think he'd have problems with Rodman.

I remember watching the 96 Bulls-Magic series and Rodman was giving Shaq fits when matched up against him, despite giving up 6 inches and about a hundred pounds. And he did it with a combination of Vlade Divac-like flopping, quick hands to disrupt Shaq's dribble, and just plain getting in Shaq's head.

Rodman was a very smart and very underrated post defender, and while he got his fair share of technical-fueled ejections, he really didn't foul out of a game (the usual way) that much.

96-98 Rodman against Timmy? I'd pay good money to see that matchup again. :hungry:

They would almost certainly have to double team him, at the very least. Rodman could NOT guard him 1 on 1. Duncan would just seal him and get layups time after time. He is giving up way too much size and strength. You're forgetting that was an extremely inexperienced O'Neal and an extremely experienced Rodman. O'Neal also has trouble with these kind of players that flop because he is a big oaf with no footwork. Duncan has superior footwork to combat Rodman's flop attempts and great control of his body.

[mardigan]

They would almost certainly have to double team him, at the very least. Rodman could NOT guard him 1 on 1. Duncan would just seal him and get layups time after time. He is giving up way too much size and strength. You're forgetting that was an extremely inexperienced O'Neal and an extremely experienced Rodman. O'Neal also has trouble with these kind of players that flop because he is a big oaf with no footwork. Duncan has superior footwork to combat Rodman's flop attempts and great control of his body.
He had no trouble with Karl Malone either, but I guess Malone was inexperienced and not as strong as Duncan either

[dbreiden83080]

Um, they swept Shaq and Orlando in 96. Shaq put up 27, 11, 3 and 2 that year, and 26, 10 and 5 in the playoffs (on 61% shooting at that).

Yeah and they got bounced by the Magic the year before in the playoffs and Tim to me is better than Shaq. I don't think the Spurs could beat the 96 team, they were that good but the 98 team and some of the teams they had in the early 90's i think they could.

[anakha]

He is giving up way too much size and strength.

As opposed to when Rodman would be matched up against Shaq? Seriously? :huh


Duncan has superior footwork to combat Rodman's flop attempts and great control of his body.

In the late eighties, Rodman's Pistons met up with Bird's Celtics several times in the playoffs. Each time they met, it was always a hard-fought (if not always close) series.

Why is this relevant?

If you wanna talk about footwork and body control in the post, you've gotta talk about Kevin Mchale. Post skills-wise, he's the best one to compare to Timmy, IMO.

And a young, inexperienced Rodman was still able to hold his own defensively against Mchale in those playoffs series. Not shut down Mchale completely, mind you, but Rodman (over Sidney Green, John Salley, and Rick Mahorn) was pretty much the best Piston to throw against him in the post.

I'm a big fan of Timmy. Really. If this matchup were to happen, I'd think he would still be able to get his. But you're grossly overestimating this matchup in his favor.

[mavs>spurs2]

When's the last time Pippen brought a team on his back and brought home a gold medal? Never. I'm not saying Manu > Pippen, but let's not act like this is some huge one-sided matchup in the Bulls favor that they would exploit over and over, because it just isn't.

When's the last time Jordan had a player like Bowen guard him, with a player like Duncan helping? Never. John Starks/Patrick Ewing doesn't exactly = Duncan/Bowen.

Yeah, Rodman would do a great job of guarding him, until the 2nd quarter arrived and he had 4 fouls on him because of his lack of size and strength.


Manu wouldn't be able to guard pippen because he would be giving up ALOT of size and strength. At the other end Pippen might be able to completely shut Manu down. Manu has never gone against a perimeter defender as good as Pippen because the only one even remotely close, Bowen, plays on the same team.

Rodman would give up a few inches but not strength. He's also a better post defender than anyone in today's league, so I wouldn't be so quick to discredit him.

And as far as Jordan goes, you have got to be out of your freakin mind if you think Bowen could guard him. Let's not forget the time period Jordan played in, he was used to alot worse things than Bowen's antics. Bowen wouldn't bother him one bit, since part of Bowen's game is getting in your head and Jordan was just too mentally tough. Not to mention they couldn't stop him before the hand check rule so no one sure as hell could now.

[kingmalaki]

Yeah and they got bounced by the Magic the year before in the playoffs and Tim to me is better than Shaq. I don't think the Spurs could beat the 96 team, they were that good but the 98 team and some of the teams they had in the early 90's i think they could.

The team that got bounced in 95 did not have a solid PF. Every Bulls championship team had a stud PF that could defend on the interior and was also quick enough to defend on the perimiter and double back for rebounds or defensive help inside. It's hard to win a title when your SG and SF lead your team in rebounds (i.e. the 95 Bulls that postseason).

[kingmalaki]

Really? Who's guarding Parker? And if you say Pippen, he already torched a similar player in Marion. They would have no answers for Parker or Duncan. The Bulls have also never played a defense like the Spurs. And if you say the Pistons, that's horse shit.

So are you saying Parker is harder to defend than Magic, Mark Jackson, Kevin Johnson, Gary Payton or John Stockton? Pippen helped to contain each of those players in Bulls title runs, and was put on Magic, Jackson and KJ specifically during those series. The fact that you compare Marion, to Scottie...who is arguably the greatest perimiter defender in the last 25 years (maybe him, MJ and Payton), shows me you don't know much about Pippen. Did you really watch him play? When the Bulls were winning he was arguably the best SF in all of basketball.

And how can you say the Bulls never played a defense like the Spurs when they went through the Pistons and the Knicks with regularity? You think the Spurs are tougher to score on than the Bad Boys? :smokin

[ashrafabdeljaber]

When\'s the last time Pippen brought a team on his back and brought home a gold medal? Never. I\'m not saying Manu > Pippen, but let\'s not act like this is some huge one-sided matchup in the Bulls favor that they would exploit over and over, because it just isn\'t.

When\'s the last time Jordan had a player like Bowen guard him, with a player like Duncan helping? Never. John Starks/Patrick Ewing doesn\'t exactly = Duncan/Bowen.

Yeah, Rodman would do a great job of guarding him, until the 2nd quarter arrived and he had 4 fouls on him because of his lack of size and strength.

Did you forget the time when Scottie Pippen lead the bulls to 55 wins and made it to the second round playoffs in 1994 before losing to the Powerful Knicks in 7 games without Michael Jordan? (The Knicks would eventually go in the finals and lose to the rockets in 7 games)

Have you forgotten that there was a player known as the \"Glove\" who was way better than bowen but couldn\'t stop Michael Jordan?

[barbacoataco]

Of course Bowen couldn't stop Jordan, but the Spurs have won series against unstoppable players who were scoring 40 ppg (Amare 2005.) The point is that Duncan, Parker, Ginobili, Bowen and their supporting cast would give the Bulls a run for their money. Who knows who would win. I would never bet REAL MONEY against Michael Jordan, because he was the best athlete I have ever seen in my almost 30 yrs. of watching sports. But the Spurs/Bulls series would be a good one-- not a blowout.

[PM5K]

Of course Bowen couldn't stop Jordan, but the Spurs have won series against unstoppable players who were scoring 40 ppg (Amare 2005.) The point is that Duncan, Parker, Ginobili, Bowen and their supporting cast would give the Bulls a run for their money. Who knows who would win. I would never bet REAL MONEY against Michael Jordan, because he was the best athlete I have ever seen in my almost 30 yrs. of watching sports. But the Spurs/Bulls series would be a good one-- not a blowout.

Thing is, for Amare 40 PPG is great, for Mike, that's damn near his Playoff average....

[PM5K]

Pippen >>>> Manu...

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

You act like there was one Jordan Bulls championship team, when in fact there were six that were as different as our four, and spread out over only one less year. Some of those teams were monsters, but the last two that beat Utah weren't all that. If you put up the '07 Spurs team, I'd say we beat the last two, but lose to the other four Bulls squads.

Now that's talking sense! :D

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

I think every squad Chicago beat in the Finals would be a contender in today’s league. The weakest team they beat is arguably the Sonics, and even they had an in-prime Kemp, Payton and tons of depth.

I don’t think Harper/Pippen (mainly Scottie) would have an issue with Tony Parker. They didn’t seem to have one with Magic, Marc Jackson, Payton, KJ, Penny (when he was a stud) or Stockton. Parker isn’t better than any of those guards.

If you think the Spurs play better defense then teams like the 80’s Pistons, 90’s Rockets, 90’s Sonics or 90’s Knicks I suggest you go watch some tapes. Those were some great defensive ballclubs.

LeBron doesn’t have a jumper…MJ does. Your defense in the Finals was built around giving him midrange shots that he couldn’t hit. Also, the Cavs are an offensively inept team. The Bulls used the triangle.

The Spurs are very much a real dynasty. I just think sometimes folks forget how good some of those losing teams in the 90's were because they didn't win championships. I think your best shot to beat those squads was the 99 team, where you still had 2 superstar players. Every title team in the 90's had 2 stars and depth (besides Houston). Every team in the 80's had 3 HOF type players, and depth. SA is great for their era, but I don't think the majority of the teams have the talent 1-12 to compete with those squads.

Good post.

Interesting thread, even if it is entirely hypothetical.

People keep bringing up the rules - I think the Spurs would adjust very quickly to 1990s rules, they'd bloody love them! 90s rules are built for our team!

I think the best point is the midrange jumpshooting of Jordan and co. If a team can make 30 midrange jumpshots, they can beat us because that's what our funnel to the baseline defense/stay at home on 3pt shooter D gives up. It seems that very few teams these days can consistently hit the midrange J, but the Bulls certainly could and that would lessen the impact of our D. However, under the old rules we could be more physical and that would make up for it somewhat.

I agree that we'd be favourites against the last two Bulls teams, but they would be favourites the rest of the time. I'd love to see it played out!

Can anyone run it through on X-box or something?

[TheAuthority]

So are you saying Parker is harder to defend than Magic, Mark Jackson, Kevin Johnson, Gary Payton or John Stockton?

None of those players were as fast or quick as Parker. They might be better all-around players, but he is harder to guard than any of them. Just look at his field goal % and points in the paint for a guy his size. Case rested.



And how can you say the Bulls never played a defense like the Spurs when they went through the Pistons and the Knicks with regularity?

Because neither of those teams can hold the Spurs jock?



You think the Spurs are tougher to score on than the Bad Boys? :smokin

Yes.

[TheAuthority]

Did you forget the time when Scottie Pippen lead the bulls to 55 wins and made it to the second round playoffs in 1994 before losing to the Powerful Knicks in 7 games without Michael Jordan? (The Knicks would eventually go in the finals and lose to the rockets in 7 games)

Gold medal, defeating the United States > 2nd round of the playoffs. Easy.


Have you forgotten that there was a player known as the \"Glove\" who was way better than bowen but couldn\'t stop Michael Jordan?

He was way better than him all-around, not on defense. Not by a long shot. Besides, Payton on Jordan is a horrible mismatch of size. Not exactly a great example. In fact, it's terrible.

[ashrafabdeljaber]

Gold medal, defeating the United States > 2nd round of the playoffs. Easy.



He was way better than him all-around, not on defense. Not by a long shot. Besides, Payton on Jordan is a horrible mismatch of size. Not exactly a great example. In fact, it's terrible.

Game 4 of the 1996 Finals. Gary Payton was put to guard Michael Jordan. Had 3 steals on him that day. For an undersized player, that's more than perfect. And you say it's terrible????

[Mister Sinister]

ditka versus god in a game of golf
Ditka.

[ashrafabdeljaber]

None of those players were as fast or quick as Parker. They might be better all-around players, but he is harder to guard than any of them. Just look at his field goal % and points in the paint for a guy his size. Case rested.




Because neither of those teams can hold the Spurs jock?




Yes.
Isiah Thomas was much quicker than Tony Parker and look how the Bulls handled him. Nice try though.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Isiah Thomas was much quicker than Tony Parker and look how the Bulls handled him. Nice try though.

Hmmm, really? I doubt he was "much quicker" if he was faster at all. In fact, I doubt Isaiah was faster than TP, which is not to say that he wasn't an excellent penetrator, which of course he was, as is TP.

[kingmalaki]

None of those players were as fast or quick as Parker. They might be better all-around players, but he is harder to guard than any of them. Just look at his field goal % and points in the paint for a guy his size. Case rested.

Dude, are you honestly going to argue that Tony Parker is tougher to cover than Kevin Johnson, Magic Johnson, Isiah Thomas or Gary Payton? Is that really your argument? All 20 ppg scorers with no low post threat to feed off of (even KJ..check his numbers pre-Barkley...check Magic's post Kareem). All 20 ppg scorers before the removal of the handcheck. All are in the top 10 in FTA's for their career (relative to their position). All had better jumpers. All better penetrators. No offense, but how old are you? If you want to argue that none of them were quicker than TP that's fine, but even then I would really question if you have ever seen Isiah or KJ play (I can't really think of two quickier, shiftier guards).

But to answer your question, KJ is a career 49% shooter (12 seasons), pre handcheck removal. John Stockton is a career 52% shooter (19 seasons), pre handcheck removal. Magic Johnson is a career 52% shooter (13 seasons), pre handcheck removal. The Bulls beat all of those guards in a series. Again, if you think TP is harder to guard than these guards then please sell what you are smoking, because you would make a killing!!!

[kingmalaki]

Hmmm, really? I doubt he was "much quicker" if he was faster at all. In fact, I doubt Isaiah was faster than TP, which is not to say that he wasn't an excellent penetrator, which of course he was, as is TP.

Even if we agree that TP is quicker than Parker, does that mean parker is harder to stop? If you are seriously going to sit here and argue that TP is a tougher cover than Isiah Thomas I don't know what to say. I know it's a Spurs board man but come on now...let's be real. I wouldn't even want to imagine Isiah playing in an era where you couldn't handcheck him.......

[WHOTTABITCH]

[QUOTE=kingmalaki]The smaller the shorts the tougher the era.[QUOTE]

[TheAuthority]

Isiah Thomas was much quicker than Tony Parker and look how the Bulls handled him. Nice try though.

Isiah Thomas = Career 45% shooter. Nice try.

[TheAuthority]

Game 4 of the 1996 Finals. Gary Payton was put to guard Michael Jordan. Had 3 steals on him that day. For an undersized player, that's more than perfect. And you say it's terrible????

First of all, when you're guarding a bigger player, it's easier to steal the ball from them. A steal doesn't mean you're playing great defense, it usually has more to do with gambling. By the way, he had 2 steals the entire game. So 3 on Jordan is bullshit. You = done.

[TheAuthority]

Dude, are you honestly going to argue that Tony Parker is tougher to cover than Kevin Johnson, Magic Johnson, Isiah Thomas or Gary Payton?

To cover? Yes. Are they better overall players than Parker? Yes.


All are in the top 10 in FTA's for their career (relative to their position).

So the referees are sucking their dicks, what exactly does that prove?


All had better jumpers.

ROFL @ Magic 'I have no jump shot' Johnson having a better jumper.


All better penetrators.

Not really. lol



But to answer your question, KJ is a career 49% shooter (12 seasons), pre handcheck removal. John Stockton is a career 52% shooter (19 seasons), pre handcheck removal. Magic Johnson is a career 52% shooter (13 seasons), pre handcheck removal. The Bulls beat all of those guards in a series. Again, if you think TP is harder to guard than these guards then please sell what you are smoking, because you would make a killing!!!

The only one you could really even argue is Kevin Johnson. Stockton had a great jump shot, when he was open off Malone's attention. He wasn't exactly a great penetrator. Magic was just bigger than almost everyone that guarded him. It's like a Dirk Nowitzki situation. What position do you guard him with? Do you consider Nowitzki a tougher cover than Parker? I don't.

[Martin R]

I think that today's Spurs are NOT THAT good yet.

I think Bruce could slow down Jordan a bit, until he gets himself in foul trouble.
Manu could guard Pippen well, he has the leg's speed to stay in front of him an draw charges.

[kingmalaki]

To cover? Yes. Are they better overall players than Parker? Yes.

Again, what are you on and how old are you? I doubt you have watched much 80's ball if you honestly think Parker is a harder cover than KJ, Payton, Isiah or Magic.


So the referees are sucking their dicks, what exactly does that prove?

So I guess this means the ref's slob on Duncan due to his FT attempts? It has nothing to do with his ability to get to the line?


ROFL @ Magic 'I have no jump shot' Johnson having a better jumper.

Parkers jumper is the most inconsistent part of his game offensively.


The only one you could really even argue is Kevin Johnson. Stockton had a great jump shot, when he was open off Malone's attention. He wasn't exactly a great penetrator. Magic was just bigger than almost everyone that guarded him. It's like a Dirk Nowitzki situation. What position do you guard him with? Do you consider Nowitzki a tougher cover than Parker? I don't.

Uh, yes..considering Dirk is a 25-27 ppg scorer on a very high %, all while being the #1 option. Parker plays off Tim.

[ashrafabdeljaber]

Isiah Thomas = Career 45% shooter. Nice try.
LOL just because Isiah Thomas = Career 45% shooter doesn't mean he is slower than Tony Parker.

[Dirk Nowitzki]

The 1998 Bulls team was the most beatable of the 6 title teams. The Pacers were up 13 in that game 7 and controlled the tempo most of the way. That team was the Bulls biggest threat. The 1998 Bulls were the 2002 Lakers....A team standing on their last legs before they get taken off the hill. The 99 Spurs were going to win it all even if that Bulls team stayed together, they would have lost in the playoffs that year.

[kingmalaki]

The 1998 Bulls team was the most beatable of the 6 title teams. The Pacers were up 13 in that game 7 and controlled the tempo most of the way. That team was the Bulls biggest threat. The 1998 Bulls were the 2002 Lakers....A team standing on their last legs before they get taken off the hill. The 99 Spurs were going to win it all even if that Bulls team stayed together, they would have lost in the playoffs that year.

Yeah, I think the 99 team had the best shot mainly because they had 2 superstars and bigs gave the Bulls trouble. They went 7 with the Knicks and Pacers. Shaq beat them (although they had no PF that year) and the Rockets used to spank them. However, I don't think any other title team had enough talent to match all the firepower on those Bulls teams, similar to how 90's teams didn't have 3 HOF type players plus depth like the title teams in the 80's had. Especially considering the other 3 title teams secondary and third scorers were perimiter players, and Chicago had the best defensive SG and SF in league history (not to mention Harper on the 2nd 3-peat squads).

[Cry Havoc]

Again, what are you on and how old are you? I doubt you have watched much 80's ball if you honestly think Parker is a harder cover than KJ, Payton, Isiah or Magic.

Um. Tony Parker could blow past any of them. Parker is easily one of the fastest guards in NBA history. There is absolutely no way to cover him without backing off 2 steps and giving him an open J. Even then, he's fast enough to get around you. There isn't a player in the league that can guard Parker right now.

[kingmalaki]

Um. Tony Parker could blow past any of them. Parker is easily one of the fastest guards in NBA history. There is absolutely no way to cover him without backing off 2 steps and giving him an open J. Even then, he's fast enough to get around you. There isn't a player in the league that can guard Parker right now.

And Isiah Thomas and KJ aren't? Were they not routinely blowing past people even though defenders were allowed to handcheck them? This is all without a dominant post player to draw defenders away when you drive and clear space for you.

Just for a comparison to today's players, it is clear that Parker and Barbosa are probably the fastest players in the league. Does that mean they are harder to stop than Kobe, T-Mac, Arenas, wade, etc just because they are faster with the ball? What about a jumpshot, a bigger body to absorb more contact, etc? Being faster than someone doesn't maean you are harder to stop. Last I checked Duncan isn't the fastest or most athletic pivot in the game, right?

[ambchang]

The amount of bias from Spurs fans is just plain embarrassing. Parker tougher to cover than Thomas, KJ, Magic and Stockton? Magic having no jumpshot despite shooting > 30% in his last 4 years and for his career? You guys are absolutely dellusional.
You guys seen how fast KJ was? Not saying that Parker is necessary slower than KJ in his prime, but KJ would at least be on the same level as Parker in terms of quickness, and the Bulls took that team out, even with Barkley in the mix.
Thomas is the godfather of scoring point guards (well, Nate Archibald) and opened the game up for little scorers like Tim Hardaway, KJ, AI, and now Parker.
Learn your history.

[mavs>spurs2]

The handcheck rule would have totally killed Parker. Players like Parker who rely totally on speed would be screwed, as would Barbosa.

[SpursFan0728]

Current Spurs would not beat the 96 Bulls.
Bulls bench has way more depth.

Also,
Manu n Duncan could not play for than 40 mins but Pipen and Jordan can

[jay014]

41-25 all-time against the bulls (http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/head2head.html)

[Dirk Nowitzki]

The 1998 Bulls were an aging team on their last legs. That team was the most beatable out of the 6 title runs. That Bulls team I honestly felt didnt have another run left in them if they had stayed together for the 99 season. The 99 Spurs were a team that went for the kill when they were in position to go for it. That was something Indiana and Utah couldnt do when they were in position. The other years 91-97 forget about it. Spurs would have fallen to them.

[mavs>spurs2]

I think as long as Jordan was playing no one would have stopped him. He probably could have played another year or two and had a great shot at more rings, but by the time he came back at like 43 it was too late. Too hard to get back into shape at that point.

[mavs>spurs2]

Scratch that he made his comeback at age 39-40, still too late to get back in the kind of shape he was in before he retired.