Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crickets
what a fucking idiot even trying to compare the Jordan Bulls and the tin man spurts lol
Only in your dreams idiots!
He says, hunched over his blowup doll of LeBrick while he fucks it feverishly, stopping only long enough to refresh his latest troll...
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
The NBA was fairly talent diluted the year the Bulls set that record. Couple that with the fact that 5 of their wins were by 3 points of less, and they had two overtime victories, and you could argue that they were lucky to reach the 70 win plateau, too. They were very, very good, but fortune smiled their way, plus they had the NBA Rating Franchise in Michael Jordan.
I used to hate the refs back then because it seemed like Jordan would be on the receiving end of so many phantom calls. Ahhh, memories.
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
If you remove the Bull's fantastic season, there is one behind it that would be the best. Then people would be able to discount that one as well for various reasons. After a while, there would be no legitimate seasons, regardless of the stats.
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ed Helicopter Jones
The NBA was fairly talent diluted the year the Bulls set that record. Couple that with the fact that 5 of their wins were by 3 points of less, and they had two overtime victories, and you could argue that they were lucky to reach the 70 win plateau, too. They were very, very good, but fortune smiled their way, plus they had the NBA Rating Franchise in Michael Jordan.
I used to hate the refs back then because it seemed like Jordan would be on the receiving end of so many phantom calls. Ahhh, memories.
Yea and mostly to blow a whistle in a difficult situation a scream HeY! by Jordan was enough.
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
The bonus of having a quick start 24 -3 . Is the spurs simply have to winh 60 % of their remaining games ( similar to their finish last year after the all star break) and their guaranteed of a 60 win season
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
polandprzem
Not only that. The leauge was weak.
And really Bulls had nobody who could concur with that at the time
http://jolieodell.files.wordpress.co...0&crop=1&h=380
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
polandprzem
the thing is that Jax teams could take it, no matter how many minutes he played them.
Well one year he overplayed Horry and Horry was bad in the playoffs
That's one of the things about Jackson that fascinates me (particularly as a Spurs fan), how does he get so many minutes from his stars?
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Fuck 72-10. If we can lock up the top two seeds in the West, I will be very happy.
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
A friend(who's a rockets fan, actually, but loves the NBA) called me today who had been on his honeymoon:
Friend: Did I just hear on the radio the Spurs are 23-3?
Me: Yeah. So if we win 18 of our next 19, we'll be on pace with the '96 Bulls.
Friend: No...you're on pace with them now
Me: Well, okay, but we won't make it I'm sure.
Friend: But it's still so impressive! Think about it this way: Even if y'all only win every other game for the rest of the year, you'll still end up with 52 wins!
When I think about it that way...man. We have set ourselves up for quite a finish!
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
LoneStarState'sPride
Not that I wouldn't love to see it happen, but there's two reasons I believe SA won't sniff that 72-10 Bulls' eye. First, the Bulls' level of competition during that season was hardly of the caliber the NBA offers in 2010. Secondly, Popovich has ALWAYS valued postseason games more than regular season success, and I highly doubt that he strays away from that bedrock principle of San Antonio's success merely to chase a regular season record.
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Give me 60+ & great PO seeding.
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
LoneStarState'sPride
Secondly, Popovich has ALWAYS valued postseason games more than regular season success, and I highly doubt that he strays away from that bedrock principle of San Antonio's success merely to chase a regular season record.
+1
The 70-9 Bulls were still playing Jordan/Pippen/Rodman more than 40 minutes in a meaningless game against the Bucks (25W-57L that season).
I don't see Pop doing that with Duncan/Ginobili/Parker (even if they were younger).
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
m33p0
like Pop would care.
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Manu_Forever
The 1990-91 Boston Celtics were 29-5 (putting them on pace to win 70 games if they stayed healthy) before a bunch of injuries started to set in. They finished the season with a 56-26 record.
To go 72-10 you have to be really good, lucky, play in a totally watered down league, and stay healthy all year.
The Spurs are really good so far and the league is incredibly watered down. But the chances of being lucky and staying totally healthy? Doubtful.
Like the Greek League, for example. A league dominated by two teams where the regular season champion has finished with a higher winning percentage than the 1996 Bulls for the last five seasons.
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mel_13
Like the Greek League, for example. A league dominated by two teams where the regular season champion has finished with a higher winning percentage than the 1996 Bulls for the last five seasons.
:lol no joke.
People really need to get a clue around here.
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Quote:
I used to hate the refs back then because it seemed like Jordan would be on the receiving end of so many phantom calls. Ahhh, memories.
Phantom calls? :lol You have to be kidding me. I swear you people have no idea how easy perimeter players have it today. Michael Jordan at his peak averaged only 7-8 free throws a game. I'm talking about a player that shot the ball anywhere from 23-26 times a game, could get to the rim anytime he wanted (and did). Let me give you a little comparison to the league Jordan played in and the candy ass league the players are competing in today.
In '93 Michael Jordan, an athletic freak in his prime, played nearly 40 minutes a game, shot the ball 26 times a game. He only shot the three about 2-3 times a game. He averaged 7 free throws that year...pretty much around the average he always had.
Manu Ginobili this year plays 32 minutes a game, shoots the ball 13 times a game. Shoots the 3 point shot about 7 times a game. And yet still somehow averages 6 free throws a game. That's basically one free throw less than Jordan for a player who puts up half the shot attempts. TWICE as many threes and plays almost a full quarter less :lol
That's how freakin easy it is for players to get to the line these days. The same goes for the rest of these stars today (D-Whistle, Lebron, Durant, etc). Michael Jordan (and Scottie Pippen for that matter) would KILL to play in this league today. If Jordan were getting any phantom calls at all he was getting them FAR less than the players of today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
polandprzem
Yea and mostly to blow a whistle in a difficult situation a scream HeY! by Jordan was enough.
I hope that was sarcasm because unlike the bitch-made stars of today Jordan never verbal flopped like a sissy to get calls. Other than Reggie Miller perimeter players used to play with integrity in that era. And Spurs fans should know what a good verbal flop sounds like since Tony Parker screams "HEY" (ala Kobe) every single time he gets in trouble in the paint.
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Yea but parkers HEY is ignored - Jordans HEYs never were
I was not sarcastic - that's the way it was and you can realize this by watching Bulls games and treatment they had back then. I'm talking about 2nd peat
btw. the defense back then was not as good as it is now.
The rules have changed because of the D getting better and refs could not handle the contact issues and game was getting slow and not fun [still they interpret it by not so strict rules]
I was not a fan of changes but it occurred to be good
Re: better than the 72-10 Bulls by winning pct?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Manu_Forever
Boston Celtics = 17 championships
LA Lakers = 16 championships
Two NBA teams have won 33 out of the 62 (53.2%) NBA championships in history. All other NBA teams combined, have won 29.
The NBA is the all-time ultimate king of 2 team leagues in the whole entire world. The NBA is, and always will be, a two team league.
PAO and Oly have combined to win 17 of the past 18 Greek League championships. That's 94.4%. (Btw, they have both started 9-0 in a 26 game season. There's a good chance that neither team will lose a single to any of the Washington General clones in that joke of a league).
And I thought you were ignoring me. Strange way to go about it.