Reply With Quote
Spurs in 6... no question
Having D-Rob, Jackson and Claxton may put us over the top but no telling.
Spurs in 6... no question
Bowen is a great defender no doubt but MJ played against better defenders in an era where defenders were allowed to be more physical. He faced the likes of Payton and Joe Dumars. If he were playing today with how the rules are enforced it will be 2 hours of him at the free throw line.
Bulls in 7
Spurs in 2. MJ gives up after losing the first two in CHI.
Bobcats in 4
payton and dumars were allowed to do more defensively, therefore they were better defenders? if joe dumars played today, he'd be fouling out. if payton played today... wait, we already saw what happened to his defensive reputation when the rules changed.
the other thing is they call traveling a lot more now. let's see his airness try to get away with the two-foot, pre-dribble hop - it ain't happening. and the bulls never faced a zone defense.
Pop took the Difensive systems,and defense mentallity and consistensy to a higher level,that's the bottom line and the key to win a championship series.
So if Pippen is on Parker, and Rodman is on Duncan, who the is going to shut down Manu on that Bulls team? Harper? LOLZ mmkay, when Manu is on (and you better believe he would step it up against a team like the Bulls) the best defenders in the league can't stop him, just repeatedly let him score or send him to the line.
I think it would be a 7 game series, either way. Bowen wouldn't be able to shut down Jordan, anymore than Rodman would get continuously schooled by Duncan. Duncan would be Rodman's worst nightmare, due the fact that Timmy wouldn't commit stupid fouls. The reason Rodman was so great on defense is that he let other players try to use their athleticism to beat him, and then he gets them out of position for bad shots/easy blocks.
It would never, ever happen with Duncan. Rodman would have an effect, but Duncan would have him in foul trouble every game. No Bulls post-defense = Spurs win in 7. If Rodman stays out of trouble, Jordan would be tough to beat.
I do not think the current Spurs could beat the 90s Bulls.
They have a shot. But It will be very difficult.
Please don't forget Toni Kukoc. He will create match-up problems for the current Spurs.
But if the series is between the 90s Bulls and the 1999 Spurs......?
, yeah. I believe the 99 Spurs can beat them in 6. Why not?
But you see, Bowen doesn't have to shut down Jordan all by himself. The Spurs have won their Championships with TEAM defense. That's how they SWEPT Lebron just a few months ago.
I don't think this happens against the current Spurs team.
Horry would've knocked Pippen on his ass!
(I love this new embedded youtube thing!)
I love Timmy, he is my favorite of all time, and Spurs are my team, but 90' Bulls would beat todays Spurs in 6, maybe even in 5 games... Who would defend Jordan? Who would defend Pip? Bruce? Many? Jordan would shut down Many, no problem, Bruce well matched by Harper. Only Timmy from Spurs without good enough defender on him... So, Tim is bigger than MJ and Pip? Bigger than MJ?
If Raef could do it (on David and Tim at the same time!), probably PIP couldnt, huh?
Come on people... it's 90's Bulls...
So, you find Kobe better than MJ in 90's ???
I'm just not so quick to think that the Bulls could have beaten this team in a 7-game.If Raef could do it (on David and Tim at the same time!), probably PIP couldnt, huh?
Oh well...there will always be the debate, but with no discernible answer, which is why I don't like to get involved in threads like these in the first place.
It's different when you have debates like Lakers/Spurs. The Lakers were dominate for three years, until they met the '03 Spurs.
There's no way to ever settle a debate like this. That being said, since I've now thrown in my two cents, I'll just throw another cog in this :
The best basketball player of all time was Wilt Chamberlain. Michael Jordan is a close second.
I'll take the '71-'72 Lakers over ANY Bulls team. Ever.
I think the Bulls would most likely put Pippen on Ginobili (especially in crunch time) and keep Harper on Parker. I think Harper's quick feet and length would bother Parker similar to what Marion did to Parker in last year's playoffs against the Suns. Since Bowen is such a non-factor on offense they would probably stick Jordan on him so he could conserve energy for offense. The Bulls were so interchangeable on defense they could really switch and pull spot duty on any of the Spurs' perimeter players if necessary.
Never say never. I'm not sure how Duncan would be Rodman's worst nightmare. The guy defended a variety of players in Shaq, Zo, Kemp, and Malone during the Bulls le runs. Rodman actually had trouble with the quick, super athletic big men (like Kemp) when playing defense. Rodman preferred playing the methodical post players in the mold of Shaq, Zo (and Duncan) because Rodman's greatest strength was that he rarely gave ground when being posted up (even Shaq had trouble backing him down in the '96 ECF) which usually resulted in the offensive player not getting his sweet spot to take the shot. And too many times in the last few years I've watched Duncan toss up some weak stuff when he couldn't get to his sweet spot on the floor. Duncan's game is tailor made for Rodman's kind of defense.I think it would be a 7 game series, either way. Bowen wouldn't be able to shut down Jordan, anymore than Rodman would get continuously schooled by Duncan. Duncan would be Rodman's worst nightmare, due the fact that Timmy wouldn't commit stupid fouls. The reason Rodman was so great on defense is that he let other players try to use their athleticism to beat him, and then he gets them out of position for bad shots/easy blocks.
It would never, ever happen with Duncan. Rodman would have an effect, but Duncan would have him in foul trouble every game. No Bulls post-defense = Spurs win in 7. If Rodman stays out of trouble, Jordan would be tough to beat.
I think the 2nd 3-peat Bulls take the series in 6. The '98 team is the most vulnerable out of the bunch because Jordan, Pippen and Rodman were obviously aging and battling injury by the last le run so that series would probably go 7. However, the '96 and '97 teams had too much length, too much savvy and the ultimate offensive/defensive tandem in Jordan and Pippen. I would never bet against them.
Now the first 3 peat Bulls is a different story. I think the Spurs would have a much greater chance of beating those teams or at least taking it to 7 games (despite Jordan and Pippen being at their athletic peaks) for the following reasons...
1. No Ron Harper. While Paxson and BJ Armstrong were great 3 point shooters they didn't have the quickness or the length to stay with Tony Parker. And since they were primarily spot-up shooters they didn't have the offensive tools to make Parker work on the defensive end either.
2. No Dennis Rodman. Horace Grant was a very hard worker and good on the boards but not near the class of Dennis Rodman when it came to defense (especially in the post) and he would truly get abused by Duncan.
3. No Kukoc. The first 3peat team didn't have a mismatch nightmare like Kukoc coming off the bench which put even more pressure on Jordan and Pippen to be at their offensive best.
4. The center position was far weaker. The center by committee (Wennington and Longley) of the 2nd 3peat kept defenses honest because they could knock down the 15-18 footer consistently when defenses collapsed on Jordan/Pippen penetrations and post-ups. The first 3peat centers (Cartwright, Perdue, and Stacey King) were horrendous offensive players and nothing more than 6 fouls apiece. Again, this put more pressure on Jordan and Pippen to be at their offensive best and against a defensive team like the Spurs that spells trouble.
I think the Spurs are a better team defensively. What they did to Lebron in last year's finals was a beautiful thing to see.
However, I think the refs would give Mike the benefit of so many calls that San Antonio would end up losing the series, and MJ would probably average 20+ points from the free throw line alone.
I used to cheer against the Bulls, and I remember that everytime Michael missed, especially in crucial games, he'd be at the free throw line. I remember a lot of phantom calls going Jordan's way, and why not? He was the NBA. His winning meant success for the league. You can't really blame the powers that be for making it easy for him.
The 90's Bulls would've beaten these Spurs in a 7 game series.
I am a huge Spurs fan, but you have to be realistic. Look at all the superstars from the 90's who don't have rings because Jordan took them all.
Jordan was God in sneakers during his prime. I think it would be close, I think it would be an incredible matchup at almost all positions, but his airness would piss us off just like the fans of every other team in the 90's not named "Bulls".
Spurs in five. We get Horry to take MJ out. j/k
Bulls in 6.
Perimeter players:
Pippen/Jordan/Harper/Kerr/Buechler v/s Bowen/Ginobili/Parker/Finley/Barry
They are better on both sides of the ball. Defensively, it is not even close. Pippen/Jordan were both top 5 perimeter defenders. We have 1 in Bowen. Harper is better than both Manu and Parker defensively. Offensively, Jordan is not the same as Lebron. Lebron has raw physicality but that's it. MJ could finish at the rim, was surprisingly strong in the post and could pull up for the 20-footer. Couple this with ruthless shot-selection and you have a versatile and efficient offensive force. Spurs have a slight edge in 3-point shooting. Rebounding: both Jordan and Pippen were tremendous rebounders. They'd eat our backcourt (and some of our frontcourt) alive on the boards.
Big men:
Duncan/Horry/Oberto/Elson/Bonner v/s Rodman/Longley/Kukoc/Wennington/Caffey
Duncan, obviously is who the Spurs would bank on both offensively and defensively. The other bigs don't compare well with the Bulls bigs. Kukoc was a versatile 6'10" forward who could handle, shoot, pass: a mismatch for us even if we put Horry on him. Rodman is probably the best rebounder of the modern era and a terrific man defender. Longley, Caffey and Wennington were in the same ballpark as Oberto/Elson/Bonner. Horry is the Spurs' X-factor with defense and clutch shooting. Spurs have an edge in the frontcourt, but not as big as the Bulls' backcourt does.
Coaching: Phil v/s Pop
Phil and Tex's theory is simple: if the triangle is execued to perfection, it is the most unstoppable offense in basketball. It doesn't have a pre-determined pattern of events like the pick-n-roll or 4-down. It is based on passing, movement without the ball, and decision making. Looks clumsy when executed by a young team (see 2005-06 Lakers), but very difficult to stop if a veteran team runs it. Bulls of 96 were the best offensive and best defensive team of that year, with a gaudy PPG difference of 12.3
Pop is a sound coach, a good X's and O's man, knows how to match-up lineups, when to call timeouts. But his teams have never looked downright dominant or menacing v/s top compe ion (I'm excluding samples like Cleveland which was too talent-deficient). Detroit in 2005 or Phoenix in 2007 were too close; Dallas in 2003 without the barrage of 3s from SJax and Kerr is something I'd rather not think about.
The rotations I have compared above are the full 10-man rotations. Spurs have a deeper rotation with a better spread of talent, but in tight games coaches go with a 7 or 8 player rotation. And the Bulls have a deadly top 7 in Jordan, Pippen, Rodman, Kukoc, Harper, Kerr, Longley. Their swarming defense and triangle execution would prove too much for the Spurs.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned Parker's ability to get to the basket with ease.
There is NO defender on the Bulls which is quick enough to keep up with Tony.
I don't care who you throw at him, he would blow by them every time. He does this on a nightly basis.
This would ultimately devastate the Bulls, and reveal their lack of interior defense.
Timmy would get his.
Manu would could dominate from the half court. He creates well with Fabs.
Yes, if it was 5 on 5, it might be interesting, but with the depth we have, the Bulls really couldn't match our energy. However that's not to say the Spurs don't beat themselves. It happens.
BUT....if the Spurs are playing Spurs Basketball to perfection we cannot be beat.
If the Spurs did this every game (I haven't seen it done more than 2-3 straight games)
We would sweep CHICAGO. You gotta be consistant though, and the Spurs have been known for playing ugly basketball from time to time.
I think the 2001 Lakers could beat the Bulls....This Spurs team is possibily the best team I've seen put together. The Spurs need to stay healthy. That was key with Chicago and all great teams.
Really it comes down to this. Our role players are better than theirs.
You have to give Tony the jumper, though. And Harper has never guarded anyone as quick as Parker, who is probably in the top 5 players in terms of pure speed to the hoop, in NBA history. His first step is simply unparalleled. Marion bothered Parker, but only because Tony didn't NEED to force the issue. The Spurs destroyed the defense of the Suns last year, so Tony was content to sit on his J, not force the issue, and dole out assists. If we would have ran some pick and rolls for Tony, he would have had Marion absolutely clueless as to how to defend him. TP WILL knock down the 18 footer with regularity these days. But why take that when there are so many other options? No one on Phoenix could guard Timmy or Manu.
The difference here is that Duncan has the ability to make his man commit silly blocking/shooting fouls, just because he is perhaps the most fundamentally sound bigman of all time. Rodman would bother him, but a couple of Duncan's pump-fakes and Rodman would be in foul trouble. There is a reason teams loathe to put their best defender on Timmy: He doesn't stay in very long afterwards. And I daresay Rodman has never faced a player who is harder to defend. Sure, centers like Shaq and Ewing were harder to -stop-. But Tim's game isn't predicated on dominating you, or overpowering you with his size. He just breaks you down, studies you, and selects the one area of defense that you can't stay with him in. And since Rodman tended to be a hothead, I think he would be prone to getting in foul trouble and losing his temper. Remember, Duncan absolutely TORCHED Ben Wallace in his prime, who plays a game much the same as Rodman did, so much so that Sheed had to come over for help, and summarily Duncan blew through the double team. If Rodman is in foul trouble much of the series, the Spurs odds are very good at winning in 6 or 7.Never say never. I'm not sure how Duncan would be Rodman's worst nightmare. The guy defended a variety of players in Shaq, Zo, Kemp, and Malone during the Bulls le runs. Rodman actually had trouble with the quick, super athletic big men (like Kemp) when playing defense. Rodman preferred playing the methodical post players in the mold of Shaq, Zo (and Duncan) because Rodman's greatest strength was that he rarely gave ground when being posted up (even Shaq had trouble backing him down in the '96 ECF) which usually resulted in the offensive player not getting his sweet spot to take the shot. And too many times in the last few years I've watched Duncan toss up some weak stuff when he couldn't get to his sweet spot on the floor. Duncan's game is tailor made for Rodman's kind of defense.
And the current Spurs don't have length? Manu is a vastly underrated defender and has incredible intangibles. He also has about 3 extra gears to go to when his team needs it. If Manu and Parker are on, the trio could be considered the very best in NBA history, yes, even alongside Jordan/Pippen/x. Parker is absolutely unstoppable when he is on, and the second the Bulls switch over for help on D, their entire team will have problems stopping Duncan inside or the host of Spurs bombers.I think the 2nd 3-peat Bulls take the series in 6. The '98 team is the most vulnerable out of the bunch because Jordan, Pippen and Rodman were obviously aging and battling injury by the last le run so that series would probably go 7. However, the '96 and '97 teams had too much length, too much savvy and the ultimate offensive/defensive tandem in Jordan and Pippen. I would never bet against them.
You match up Duncan, Horry in playoff mode, Bowen, Manu, and Parker, and there is a ton of length from the 2-5 positions, not to mention a healthy dose of Oberto-Manu off the bench. Obviously Jordan is the best player on the court at any time, but I'll take Duncan-Parker-Manu if all three are on over Jordan-Pippen-Harper or anyone else you want to slide in there. It's not that the Bulls are stoppable. They aren't. But I don't think they've ever faced a team that is as solid on D as the Spurs are. The Spurs would also make for one of the best offenses they have ever faced.
I honestly think it comes down to Manu's play. If he's on, the Spurs take the series. If he's not, the Bulls dispatch the Spurs fairly handily.
Last edited by Cry Havoc; 12-27-2007 at 12:46 AM.
Jordan was so great that spurs fans are taking him for granted, He would shut down Ginobili and he would still drop 40-45pts on the spurs. Sure Duncan would get his but it would not come easy as Rodman would be swarming him everytime he got the ball. I doubt Bruce Bowen would have much of an effect on MJ, If Gary Payton didn't affect MJ's game I seriously doubt Bowen could! Parker would get stuffed or he would get injured if he tried to do some of his fancy layups on Rodman, he would be mentally scarred and he would be afraid to go into the paint because a hard ass nba foul would have him on his ass all series long. Jordan or Pippen could shut him down easily. if he had a good midrange/three point game I would have another opinion. Kukoc comming off the bench would be desastrous. Bulls in 5
I think some of you are too young to have actually watched Jordan through his career. Anyone that compares the current Lebron James to Jordan in his prime is delusional. There's nobody like Jordan now. Wade was close starting in the playoffs the year before their Finals run, but Jordan played like that every single game of his career against every hall of famer of that era. It was so frustrating watching the Spurs play the Bulls and seem to be in control until Jordan just took it away.
In my opinion the current Spurs are vastly - far and away - better than any team the Bulls faced in the Finals. I think the Spurs, playing well, would be capable of pushing the series to seven games against a couple of those Bulls teams, and anything can happen in a single game. It would take a number of lucky bounces to beat Jordan though, and I don't think even that's enough to deny him. I never saw anyone stop him when he decided he was going to beat you. I can't say that about any other athlete in history. Tiger Woods comes the closest.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
