Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Jordan's Bulls vs the Warriors of the past 3 years (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Riversco
- Start date
Henry Ford
Footballguy
In the finals, Didn't he career average 42-43? [edit: was thinking of his record 41 series. Oops.] That's what we're really talking about here, isn't it? A finals series for best team?Holy ####, someone said Jordan would average 45 ppg today?
I think you guys are massively underestimating how good those teams were. And how good Jordan was. today's players talk about being sick or having a tweaked knee as an excuse. Jordan had full on food poisoning and put up 38 in game 5 of the NBA finals while leading the team in points, steals, assists, and free throws against a team with Stockton and Malone on it.
Last edited by a moderator:
shader
Footballguy
I'm half shtick. I hate Curry and this is a silly thread that can't be tested.
But yes I do think if you transported Steph Curry to the mid 90s he wouldn't be the superstar he is today. He's the perfect player for the modern game imo.
But in that NBA I feel he'd struggle at times a lot more than he does now. Some of the excellent perimeter defenders, the handcheck rule and the fact that he'd get beat up if he tried to come inside would combine to make him less of a threat than he currently is.
Jordan, if given the same access to "modern technology" that all of today's athletes get, would still dominate the NBA, although as always it was Pippen who was the heartbeat of that team.
shader
Footballguy
Jordan is still the GOAT and no one has come close.
Jordan/Pippen v Durant/Curry in a 2 man game would be a bloodbath. Yeah KD and Steph would get their points, but they'd have no prayer on defense and would get annihilated.
scoobus
Footballguy
Bruce Dickinson
Footballguy
Pick any of the other title/Finals teams from the era, like 1995 HOU (who came from deep in the bracket to win it all) or even 1999 SAS (who just bulldozed the league once they got revved up) and GSW wins easily. Heck, pick a couple of the weaker Bulls title teams like 93 or 98 and it's an uphill battle. But IMO the 96 edition could adapt to today's game in ways other teams from the era couldn't because they didn't play the game the way others from the era did and their perimeter personnel are uniquely qualified to handle all the movement and switching around the three-point line other teams, even great teams, from the era weren't equipped to handle.
scoobus
Footballguy
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
They had never seen a player who could pull up off the dribble and hit 40% from three (the equivalent of shooting 60% from the field) in 1996. Might as well ask how they'd fare if the Monstar who could shoot the ball from half court out of a cannon in his chest would fare.
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
No comparison? Come on already. Olympic records for track and field arent much different. Events that involve jumping are still old, with the exception of the 110 meter hurdles. Is bolt's 19.30 that much more impressive than 19.32?
Like pippen wasnt a physical freak. Like rodman wasnt. Like jordan wasnt.
The best thing the warriors would have going for them would be the fact that the bulls wouldnt expect half the shots that went up. It would take two games to adjust.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Yeah I think if you gave them a couple years to take advantage of all the advancements in training and technique they could maybe eventually hang. Then the most obvious difference is the huge difference in the respective talent pools they dominated.
Bruce Dickinson
Footballguy
How recent is the last title team GSW would sweep and win every game by 20?
And how far down in the 2017 standings do you have to go to find a team that would only crush the 96 Bulls 4-1 in a best-of-seven?
Last edited by a moderator:
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
The problem is that you're not comparing two freaks like Bolt and Michael Johnson. You're comparing two ten-man rotations obviously not comprised of the twenty best players. So the better comparison is the average time for the top 200 in the 200 meters or whatever. I bet the difference would be much bigger.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Dunno. Problem is the Warriors are awesome in their own right. Like, they might obliterate the 2006 Heat or 2010 Lakers not only because of the smaller differences in eras but more because they're way more talented than those teams. I think they'd easily sweep all but one or two teams in the current NBA, honestly. They might sweep the Cavs.
Bruce Dickinson
Footballguy
What's the average margin of victory when 2017 UNC sweeps the 96 Bulls in a best-of-seven?
Dedfin
Footballguy
Great story. I wonder if Lebron James will ever have any good NBA stories. Maybe one day?
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Now you're talking.
A sweep is asking a lot of those youngsters. Too much inconsistency from game to game. 96 Bulls steal at least one game, maybe two.
jvdesigns2002
Footballguy
If the results of basketball games were primarily determined through athleticism--the Spurs, Mavs, and the current Golden State team would not be champions. They all won against teams that were more athletic than they were. In todays NBA--a player is far more likely to be effective being a 3 point shooter than they are being athletic. In this current hypothetical matchup--saying that Golden State would win because athletes today are better makes no sense. If those teams played against each other today--the best athlete by far on the court would easily be Jordan. Steph plays quick and can shoot--but he's certainly not more athletic than Jordan or Pippen. Klay is certainly not someone that stands out as an athletic freak relative to world class athletes--even from 20 years ago. Durant is tall and has a long wing span--but I have seen nothing from him that makes him more athletic than Jordan or Pippen. Really the "athletic" argument would make more sense for somebody picking the Bulls--not the Warriors. If the Warriors were to win--it would be because of their shooting--not their athleticism.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Oh, right. Thanks. Only 11 of more than Curry averaged in the finals last year. I was thinking of the record average he has of 41 per game for a finals.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Dedfin
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
This "the warriors would blow out the 72-win Bulls in a series by 20 per game" is just stupid.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Dedfin
Footballguy
There are no rules. We are talking about time travel here, with one human being on both teams. How does the Steve Kerr thing even work? As soon as the Warriors play the Bulls, would Steve Kerr's memories of the game be updated in real time? If so, he could coach the team knowing exactly what the Bulls would do the entire time. Think about that. Each possession. Each inbounds play. Halftime adjustments? HA! Their opposing coach knows what will happen. I think the Bulls wouldn't stand a chance. My prediction is something like 4-0 sweep by Warriors, averaging at 20+ point wins each game. It would be a slaughter.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Unless Kerr actually prefers the Bulls team and Jordan to the whiny, crying primadonnas of this year. In which case he would not only know what he would do in advance but also actively work against the Warriors.
Frostillicus
Footballguy
Dedfin
Footballguy
That's a pretty good point Henry. I guess it comes down to your preference of the current you versus the past you. Maybe I should tweet to Steve Kerr and ask him this.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
So just out of curiosity, 1996 Yankees - Cone, Pettitte, Rogers, Mendoza, Gooden, and Key starting with Mariano Rivera backing the rotation up.
Wade Boggs, Tino, Jeter, we're talking about a team where Strawberry was a utility player.
Cubs Last year would kill em?
Wade Boggs, Tino, Jeter, we're talking about a team where Strawberry was a utility player.
Cubs Last year would kill em?
wikkidpissah
Footballguy
Can't believe this has gone 5 pgs and aint gonna read back. Also have little interest in comparing teams because the eras of the game make them almost different sports. But people are seriously questioning the fortyability of Jordan in an era without handchecking and when entire teams can successfully base an entire defensive concept on Jordan's greatest talent, lane-jumping? We won't even go into the outside work Mike woulda done maturing his game, instead of refining it going inside as he did. MJ's not even #1 in my alltime chooseup but i have no trouble believing he would avg more ppg off steals alone than James Harden's game avg would be against him. Y'all's nutz
Last edited by a moderator:
Bruce Dickinson
Footballguy
Dedfin
Footballguy
How would 1944 Army, 2001 Miami, or 1955 (or whenever, they won a million straight games) Oklahoma do against 2016 Clemson?
Tau837
Footballguy
They wouldn't match up that way. Harper would take Curry, Jordan would take Thompson, Pippen would take Durant, and Rodman would take Green. Rodman would goad Green into multiple technicals and a suspension... but, really those would be better matchups. Of course there would be switching and cross matching, and occasional changeups, but that would be how they would line up IMO.
Not sure who the top 20 defenders of all time are, but agree those three were elite NBA defenders in 1995-96, which is the year we are comparing.
Tau837
Footballguy
Jordan averaged 33.6 ppg in his Finals career, including 41.0 ppg against the Suns in 1992-93 and 35.8 ppg against the Blazers in 1991-92. With hand checking allowed. IMO it is an easy call to think he would average 40+ -- a mere 6.4 ppg more -- with no hand checking and some of the other changes in today's game (e.g., the flail shot when a defender reaches, resulting in 2-3 free throws).
Tau837
Footballguy
While this is true, you seem to assume that none of Phil Jackson or his elite perimeter defenders would be able to adjust. Have to disagree there.
Plus, you ignore the other side of it. These Warriors have never seen a player like Jordan, either. Kobe ain't Jordan. Lebron ain't Jordan (not saying he isn't top 5 all-time, but his game is obviously quite different). Frankly, I don't think they've ever seen a player like 1996 Rodman either... Draymond Green is like a poor man's version.
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Why? Jordan took Isaiah Thomas and John Stockton in defense. Why wouldn't he take Curry?
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Ilov80s
Footballguy
It's how I would match them up but the Bulls were so defensively strong that it almost doesn't matter. Rodman 2x defensive poty and 8 time first team defender, Jordan 1x defensive poty and 9 time first team defender, Pippen 8x first team defender and 2x second team defender. I know the award of all defensive team didn't start till 68 but all 3 of them are in the top 8 for most career. selections. Warriors have never played a defense that good.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
The only quantifiable independent performance metric I can think of in baseball is fastball velocity- only thing measured back then- and that's way up. And yet current hitters can still hit these insane arms.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Why, did Reggie Miller not exist in this universe you've created? Hornacek? Dennis Scott?
Mario Kart
Footballguy
Jordan would probably be on Curry most of the time. Jordan's length would cause him fits but Phil would change up defenses or switch players to constantly make Curry guess which would also make the team wonder what the look will be this time down the court. Like someone said above, there hasn't been a player like Rodman in the league since Rodman. He would, possibly, give Golden State more fits than Jordan/Pippen on defense. Hell, seeing Rodman defend Lebron would have been awesome. Rodman would hold him and cause him fits each game.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
You guys are acting like I'm 28. I was around for the Bulls dynasty. I'm a UNC fan whose first basketball memory is Jordan hitting the shot to win the 82 title. I'm not inclined to dismiss him or the bulls.
Jordan averaged 33.6 ppg in his Finals career, including 41.0 ppg against the Suns in 1992-93 and 35.8 ppg against the Blazers in 1991-92. With hand checking allowed. IMO it is an easy call to think he would average 40+ -- a mere 6.4 ppg more -- with no hand checking and some of the other changes in today's game (e.g., the flail shot when a defender reaches, resulting in 2-3 free throws).
I actually think the bias is the other way. We glorify the past and give the present short shrift. Fact is, the Warriors won 73 games last year against an NBA that draws from a massively expanded talent pool thanks to the globalization of the game and the significantly increased salaries. That alone suggests they're superior even before you get to the improved athletes, the improved strategy, etc.
Oh, and also adding Durant. He's pretty good. Not a lot of guys with 7'6" wingspans and quick first steps who could hit 40% from three and almost 90% from the line back in the 90s, least not that I can remember.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Reggie Miller might be the most overrated player ever. People have a fond memory of him because of two games: the Knicks game where he scored 8 points in like 9 seconds and the near-buzzer beater against the Bulls.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
I agree with a lot of this point but I think it's slightly less significant because the Bulls had 3 HoF players. Jordan might be the best ever. Pippen was voted top 50 all time and there's an argument to make Rodman is the best defensive player and rebounder of all time. The Bulls were not an amalgamation of average or above average players. They were spear headed by all time greats.
Dedfin
Footballguy
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Pippen was one of the 50 best in 1996, but if they did that again today, would he make the list? I am guessing he would, but he probably shouldn't.
Bruce Dickinson
Footballguy
No. Those teams are in the 20-30 win range, maybe as high as 35 but if they are over 30 wins they suck at tanking.
I was referring to a middle band of teams comprising of last 5-6 playoff teams and the best records among teams that missed the postseason.
I freely admit I made a big assumption by thinking of a 41-41 team as "average" when I thought of this.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
True, he would fall back. I should adjust to top 100.
looked it up and he was 27th so he still might be top 50.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bruce Dickinson
Footballguy
Depends on if you're thinking of it as the 50 greatest relative to their own era or not.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Players who were not on the list who I would definitely put ahead of him would include James, Duncan, Bryant. Curry, Durant, Garnett and Nowitzki. And you could make a good argument for Wade, as well.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
